I took a look at the specfile and it looks like I was wrong, sorry. On 10/10/05, Adam Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Axel, > > Is this true for the 0.3.x or 0.4 versions as well as the 0.2.0 > versions from your archive? I thought the 0.3.x versions didn't have > the -ivtv extension? > > > Keith is correct. This mechanism allows to deploy ivtv's versions and > > have the user choose between the kernel's version (no aliases) and > > ivtv's version (with the aliases). > > > > This was introduced a year or so ago, when a first attempt was made to > > get msp3400 merged back to v4l/kernel, and a fast method of comparing > > them was needed. > > > > My recommendation (for now and future) is: Try w/o any aliases and if > > something doesn't work add them one by one. E.g. bad detection, then > > try ivtv's tveeprom and tuner modules, bad sound, then try ivtv's > > msp3400. > > > > And please report successes and failures as feedback for the ongoing > > merge efforts! > > -- > > Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net >
_______________________________________________ ivtv-devel mailing list [email protected] http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-devel
