are there no better supported chips with similar functionality and similar price points? if there are, why not move to them?
if you keep banging your head on the wall, all you end up with is a bloody forehead. in the interests of full disclosure. i am a lurker here. have been for several years. i have several devices with AW chips in them. i have not plugged one in in a long time. have signed up for a pine64. but really not sure why i bothered. i cannot see the situation changing unless there is a fundamental shift in thinking from allwinner. — simon > On 2 Jan 2016, at 17:32, Manuel Braga <mul.br...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 05:47:18 -0800 (PST) Rosimildo DaSilva > <rosimi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Nove, >> >> I believe this community should take the ENCODER from a PoC level to > > Who is this community? The same people that are here with zero support > from the ones that have the most to benefit. > > Do you all expect from us to do all this huge work in this unfavorable > conditions? > > >> a more or less demo similar to the one released by AW using the blobs > > There are priorities and it arrives to a point in which we have to make > a choice. We are here to make proper software, and the next step in > this route is a proper driver for this video engine. > > But this will not happen tomorrow or in the next month, this is just > not possible when this unfavorable conditions persist. > > >> >> It is very important ( IMHO ), if it works with a modern AW soc, such >> as H3, since it is probably the most used SOC from AW, since the A20, >> with the release of OPI-PC, and now with the sub $10's release on the >> pipeline, they would be even more popular! > > If it is very important, why do we have zero support? Why isn't those > hardware vendor and its users here asking for assistance? > > What can it be seen, is that in this last year events. not even a > single discussion about the "license issues" in the forums of the > random vendor. (expect one occurrence in a vendor blog) > > This shows the level of support and respect of the software that they > are using. For this hardware vendors what they care is to sell the > random board, and for that they only care about software the sufficient > to fool the clueless user in giving them the money. > > For that, everyone is happy with an old kernel/uboot with random gpl > violations and random license issues. > > With all this issues, with dumped old kernel trees that break api > backward compatibility in every random soc release, it is very hard to > offer adequate proper software. > > Look at the case of rockchip, in which its developers (full with > rock-chips.com email) are contributing to the mainline kernel, that is > not because one day they feel like to do this. But because of > costumers that requested this kind of support, which google with its > chromeos business is a direct cause. > > In allwinner world, this doesn't exist. > > > >> >> I think starting from the initial demo provided by Jemk's for A20, it >> should not be terribly difficult to get it to work with H3.... >> https://github.com/jemk/cedrus/tree/master/h264enc > > If someone is in hurry to get something that works for the required > user case, they are free to do those work themselves. > We are here to offer help and assistance within our limits. > > > >> >> What is missing on this example to be similar to the example provided >> by AW, it lacks: >> >> + motion detection >> + initial header info ( to be sent periodically ). >> > > If someone wants for us to do this work, they must give us a *valid* > reason, of why we should stop doing what we are doing now and prioritize > this request. > > >> Get this running on a H3 would be very useful to have a user base >> that might push the open source solution really the way to go.... > > For that to happen, we need to have an user base that prefers a libre > and open source solution first. > > Instead of a user base that prefers to run around a proprietary library > binary blobs with a long history of license ambiguity issues. > > > -- > Manuel Braga > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "linux-sunxi" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
