> BTW: Someone at the ieee1394-devel ml wrote, that a main reason to > create a new interface (-> the new dv1394 module) was that V4L2 does not > report dropped frames during capturing. Is this true? If so, that might > be something to fix before merging into the kernel...? That was true for the old v4l interface. v4l2 has timestamps and sequence numbers for video frame buffers. For other comments on the API look check the recent discussions on the v4l2 api last days. For DV data we likely have to add V4L2_PIX_FMT_DV. You might also have a look at the current "struct v4l2_timecode", DV likely is the first one who might use it. If there is something wrong we should fix it before submitting v4l2 into 2.5.x ... Gerd -- You can't please everybody. And usually if you _try_ to please everybody, the end result is one big mess. -- Linus Torvalds, 2002-04-20
