Re: [V4L] v4l2 + kernel

[Gerd Knorr]

> > Hmm, looks like I've missed that part of the v4l specs until today.
> > IMHO it is a very bad idea as long as devfs is optional.  Creating
> > special files is the job of /sbin/MAKEDEV, not the job of the admin.
> > The different device types need fixed minor number mappings.
> 
> Devfs will be as optional as procfs is today, I think.

We will see.  Right now it isn't only optional, it is flagged as
"experimental".

> When there is really a need for v4l2 + non-devfs it can be crapy,
> cant it?

Why?  I havn't seen any good argument so far why *not* having fixed
minor ranges is better.

  Gerd



_______________________________________________
Video4linux-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list