On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> >
> > Mike wrote:
> >
> >> > > The pvrusb2 driver has its own input name for
> >> > > radio.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm, dubious behavior as well.
> >>
> >> The pvrusb2 driver treats the radio internally as "just another input",
> >> it is after all effectively another input. However if you open the
> >> radio device node, the driver also switches to that input. I don't see
> >> anything dubious about that.
> >>
> >> -Mike
> > I like this behaviour. Input switching is easier to use in applications
> > compared to opening and closing devices.
>
> Well, I think it is not according to the v4l2 spec. However, the way radio
> works in v4l2 sucks, so this might be time to change the spec. I agree
> that having a separate input for radio is cleaner.
Remember that opening /dev/radioX still produces the correct result.
That is enough for any V4L radio application to use the driver without
change.
Of course, there's that little issue of streaming the audio which is
unfortunately not very standard, but that's a whole different problem.
But with the pvrusb2 driver, the radio app can open /dev/radio0 and then
mplayer (or any mpeg streamer) can be used to open either /dev/video0 or
/dev/radio0 (again) to stream out the audio - with the radio app still
having full control over the radio.
It seems that the only "out of spec" aspect for selecting the radio here
is the mere existance of the radio as an additional input choice when
/dev/videoX is opened. That seems hardly a problem, and I also seem to
remember that it's up to the driver to define its inputs, not the spec.
As for changing the spec, well obviously I like the idea of treating the
radio as just another input, since after all that's what it is...
-Mike
--
Mike Isely
isely @ pobox (dot) com
PGP: 03 54 43 4D 75 E5 CC 92 71 16 01 E2 B5 F5 C1 E8
_______________________________________________
ivtv-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-devel
