On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 08:47 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: > severity 437298 normal > thanks > > > Mark Purcell wrote: > > ivtv 0.10.x is only for kernels >= 2.6.18 and <= 2.6.21.x > > didn't know that, sorry. > > > the ivtv modules have been incorporated into the kernel from 2.6.22 onwards > > and the ivtv package 1.0.x is for kernels >= 2.6.22. This release does NOT > > contain the ivtv driver proper, as that is now part of kernel 2.6.22. > > It does contain test tools, utilities and the ivtv-fb and saa717x drivers > > > > We need to think about how to incorporate in Debian. > > well, then let's just drop the ivtv-source package and be done with it, > from the kernel point of view, right?
The 2.6.22 kernel contains the ivtv driver itself but not the ivtv-fb driver, I suspect that will be in 2.6.24 (I think it missed 23) so the -source package is still somewhat useful. I tried backporting the 1.0.0 ivtv-fb bits + 2.6.22 ivtv bits to older kernel so we could continue to support all 2.6.18+ kernels but unfortunately extensive changes would be required to the v4l layer in the kernel so it turned out to be impractical. The 1.0.0 release utilities are also not compatible with the 0.10.x drivers so including two sets of source in the package won't work either. I'm reluctant to include two sets of utilities. Now that 2.6.22 is in unstable I think the best course of action would be to upload the 1.0.0 release. People with <2.6.21 kernels can still use the 0.10.x packages which I'll continue to make available on my website. I've already prepared the changes for the 1.0.0 release (pretty trivial) but not finalised them since I was trying this backport thing. I'll hopefully commit it this week some time. I also need to investigate the X driver and compatibility with the new framebuffer interface but that's a separate issue. Cheers, Ian. -- Ian Campbell Happiness makes up in height what it lacks in length.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part