On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 alsa@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Tuukka Toivonen wrote: >> I don't think so: in a generic plugin system, parts of the driver could be >> moved into userspace plugins. >is it a safe and secure way? Certainly, if the kernel interface is, and needless to say, it should be. >> the camera exposure time. Another example: automatic focus control. >it is very specific things. why not the side library? I think that a plugin system like Gstreamer is the best way to implement the "side library". However, Gerd disagrees: >gstreamer IMHO isn't the solution through. I doubt making gstreamer a >requirement to talk to v4l devices would be accepted by the users and >developers. gstreamer does to much (it is more that libasound for >video) and has to much dependencies (glib, xml, ...). Hmm, it is possible. This is been discussed on Gstreamer mailing list. But it doesn't have that many dependencies really, except for the plugins (which are all optional anyway). glib dependency is inconvenient, but I think that an object-oriented approach is necessary, and unless you want to use C++ (which many people don't want to use), there's little choice. However, I'd rather avoid writing a conversion library from scratch, since after all, Gstreamer already exists. I'll reconsider this again after I have actually written some Gstreamer code (so far I have just read the manual).
