[Gllug] webcams on linux

[Sean Burlington]

Tethys wrote:
> Sean Burlington writes:
> 
> 
>>>I fai to see how that page changes any of the disadvantages of binary
>>>modules/drivers. My email was in response to a particular point:
>>
>>sorry - I thought you were discussing webcams on Linux, in which case 
>>(for the driver I am most familiar with) your statements are incorrect
>>
>>points 1 and 2 assert a dependance on the maufacturer which does not 
>>exist in this case
> 
> 
> Yes it does. If the module loading scheme changes yet again (and it
> seems to be doing so every week or so, these days :-), then there's
> every chance that the pwcx module won't work, at which point, you'll
> just have to wait until the vendor releases an updated version. Or is
> the webcam still usable without that module?
> 

first of all - if I haven't made it clear yet - I agree that open source 
is good (do I really need to say it on this list?)

I was just trying to say that this particular case is better than your 
average binary-only situation.

mainly because its not the manufacturer/vendor who releases the module

it is instead done by a member of the open source community (much of 
this project is covered by the gpl) who is much more responsive to 
kernel changes than your average manufacturer.

the webcam *is* still usable with pure gpl code (as I said it worked out 
of the box with a standard debian kernel)

But maybe having a binary only compression module removes the impetous 
behind a fully gpl solution ... or maybe not ...

-- 

Sean



-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug