webcamd regression 0.1.20->0.1.23: recv bulk message failed: -32
Jan Henrik Sylvester
me at janh.de
Mon Apr 25 14:23:59 UTC 2011
On 04/24/2011 20:03, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 24 April 2011 19:05:17 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>> On 04/24/2011 10:47, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>> The V4L sources I've used might be a bit out of date. I've refreshed the
>>> onces I have and uploaded a new tarball.
>> Thanks, now your 0.1.25 tarball, which is still not working for me, and
>> my 0.1.24 tarball from revision 1797, which is working for me, are much
>> more similar.
>> Besides the version number, the only difference is which files are
>> contained. You got these files that I have not gotten in my tarball:
> ^^ I've removed these files now.
> ^^^ can you send me the diff between your working and non-working tarball off-
> list, and I will check it.
The difference is really only which files are present and which are not.
Your 0.1.25 tarball produces a webcamd that has my issue. Your 0.1.25
tarball with dvb-usb-urb.c deleted produces a webcamd that does not seem
to have my issue.
I have compared buildlogs and saw that the only difference is that in
one case it is compiling
v4l-dvb/linux/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-usb/dvb-usb-urb.c and in the other
case is is compiling dvb-usb-urb.c (without the path).
Looking at the difference of the two files, one has the zero pointer
check in lines 45 to 46 while the other has the stability fix in lines
54 to 65. Thus, I created dvb-usb-urb.c with both or none of the fixes
to see which is affecting me.
For me, it does not matter, whether or not the zero pointer check is in
dvb-usb-urb.c, but if the stability fix is in there, I have my issue,
without the stability fix, I have no issue.
Can the stability fix be removed or is there a way to correct the
stability fix that it does not have these side effects for me?
More information about the freebsd-multimedia