[mythtv-users] Re: Has anyone setup v4l2 succesfully?

[Colin Armstrong]

All I can say is that the ATrpms kernel did not work very well for me.
Here were my two problems with it; one, after I used apt-get to install
the ATrpms kernel, I could not use apt-get any more because of it saying
that it was missing two dependencies, one of which was a higher apt-get
version. I checked apt-get itself and it was a higher version than what
it said it wanted. I even told apt-get to run a dependency check and
update anything that it found to be old, but apt-get still did not work.
After I gave up on apt-get, I still tried to use the ATrpms kernel, but
I had more trouble. This time it was with the .config file. I found this
out because after I gave up on apt-get, I tried to compile and install
some of the software that apt-get would not install, manually. I could
not compile this software because I got errors where it could not find
the .config file.
I don't think it was me that made the ATrpms kernel not work because
apt-get downloaded and installed it all for me, but I guess I still
could have done something wrong. If it works for other people, great; it
just did not work for me.
To answer your question about which patch caused all of the problems for
me; my answer is all I know is that it was not the V4L2 patch, because I
patched a kernel with that and it worked fine. It easily could have been
one of the already installed Red Hat patches in the kernel. The Red Hat
kernel may have just not gotten along very well with my stock 2.4.21
kernel that I was using. I don't know.
I do think that it is very good that these are available, because if
they work for even just a few people, then it was worthwile to make
them. The kernel just did not work for me.
Colin
On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 22:06, Jarod C. Wilson wrote:
> On Wednesday, Colin Armstrong wrote:
> 
> > Well, the reason I say that the .config was not included with the 
> > ATrpms
> > kernel is because I tried to compile something and it failed because of
> > now .config file. Now it easily could have been in a abnormal place, 
> > but
> > at least for me it was not in the normal place.
> 
> Not in the normal place? It was in the exact same place(s) Red Hat 
> always puts their kernel config files... Where else would you expect it 
> to be?
> 
> > Also, sorry for the
> > confusion about the kernel recompile; I didn't have to patch the ATrpms
> > kernel with V4L2; I had to patch the stock kernel with V4L2.
> 
> Okay.
> 
> > And about
> > it made life worse; I meant that it just made it harder to compile
> > software.
> 
> A patched kernel shouldn't make it harder to compile software...
> 
> > Red Hat patches their kernels so much already that not too
> > many things are done normally inside of a Red Hat kernel.
> 
> Red Hat does typically backport features from newer kernels, which can 
> make patching their kernels more difficult than patching vanilla 
> kernel.org kernels. That's a good reason to use a kernel like those 
> from ATrpms, where someone intimately familiar with Red Hat's kernel 
> source has already done the dirty work.
> 
> > For me at
> > least, the extra patches that are in the ATrpms kernel made the kernel
> > even more unstable than usual fore me.
> 
> Such as? The extra patches are:
> 
> 1) Added support for SGI's XFS
> 2) updated i2c support
> 3) 3ware Escalade kernel driver
> 4) v4l2
> 
> What of those do you think was causing the problem? The kernels are 
> otherwise identical to Red Hat's.  I've run several ATrpms kernels on a 
> number of different systems, and they are all rock-solid. The only 
> patch I've not touched on is the 3ware driver, since I don't have one 
> of those cards. I'm sure Axel would appreciate any feedback with 
> respect to problems with his kernels.
> 
> At the very least, you could look at Axel's kernel source and see what 
> he had to do with Red Hat's stock kernel to patch in v4l2 support.
> 
> --Jarod
> 
> 
> > On Thu, 2003-08-14 at 13:46, Jarod C. Wilson wrote:
> >> On Thursday, Colin wrote:
> >>
> >>> I recompiled my kernel twice hoping for V4L2 support. The first time 
> >>> I
> >>> got the kernel suggested from by link below using apt-get, but that
> >>> kernel did not come with a .config file. This would not be a problem
> >>> except this kernel made my apt-get think it was a version lower than 
> >>> it
> >>> was, so I had to  install some stuff by hand but, I couldn't because 
> >>> I
> >>> lacked a .config file from the kernel.
> >>
> >> .config files are included with the kernel-source packages for ATrpms
> >> kernels, just like the stock Red Hat kernels. There is also a copy of
> >> your running kernel .config file in /boot, which does come with the
> >> kernel package. Look again, I think you are mistaken. There was never
> >> any need to recompile the ATrpms kernels either. They are already
> >> patched with v4l2 support.
> >>
> >>> Also the kernel suggested is a
> >>> patched Red Hat kernel, which made life even worse. So I recompiled
> >>> with
> >>> a regular stock kernel and patched it with V4L2, which then worked
> >>> perfectly.
> >>
> >> What about it made life worse? It works perfectly for me, and many
> >> others. Any feedback on what went wrong with the kernel would be
> >> appreciated, because it has been flawless here with my PVR-250.
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users