On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Justin Schoeman wrote: > > For a new application, I would say, go with v4l2. v4l2 should be in the > 2.5 series kernel, and with Gerd's new patches, it is becomming easier > to set up a 2.4 kernel with v4l2 (http://www.bytesex.org - look at the > bttv0.8.x series). > > v4l is horribly bttv specific, and practically worthless for serious > video capture applications. > > v4l2 is designed from the ground up to be a completely generic, yet > flexible interface. It easily handles all the challenges of video > recording. > > If you want a simple example of fully API compliant v4l and v4l2 > capture, have a look at NVrec on http://www.ee.up.ac.za/~justin/v4l2. > Look out for all the comments in v4l1_core.c - you can easily see my > opinion of v4l there! Well - I'm a happy v4l2 user, capturing many hours of video per week using it. I was previously using Justin's bttv2 driver. Lately I'm using Gerd's bttv 0.8 series with v4l2 support. So that's two implementations - and compatibility seems pretty good. I capture with mp1e (in the zapping cvs), though I must try NVrec again sometime. Steve
