Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview-20060920-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: With new release of luvcview, i feel it got well matured to enter in Fedora Extras. New release now contains the most awaited feature of video recording from webcam. Though this viewer can only be used when you already have uvcvideo kernel driver installed, i don't think i should add uvcvideo package as BR. People can direclty grab kernel module source and install it. I am using this package since last 2 months without any problem on FC5 and FC6.
Why not submit the kernel driver for review too? Having a package that requires users to download kernel drivers from source and compile it is far from the ideal situation.
rahul, it looks to me that gspca kernel module is failing to get its approval in FE. But is it really necessary that package can only be included in FE with all its (NOT ESSENTIAL but required to work) dependencies. I mean can't it possible to get approval to this package with no dependency on kmod package and let end user install kmod tarball manually and use this package without any problem?
Where did FESCo discuss and disapprove this module? Please point me to the proposal and discussion.
Nope its not discussed on FESCo. But if you see the progress made at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209112 its clearly seen that to me that FESCo will not going to discuss this package. Thats why i wrote it looks to me that gspca package is failing to enter in FE, so just thought is there any other way for luvcview package to be included in FE? And I yet don't know about whether FESCo like to discuss each and every kmod package submission or only those whose answers they got in BUGZILLA. The only 2 questions when this module appear in main kernel and why its not. Though i presented answeres to them from discussing same with gspca Author there are some things that prevents this kmod in FE as written in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209112#c3 Above points was my base while writing comment #2 here
I would prefer FESCo actually discuss and explicitly deny this module rather than a assumption that it will happen. If the module is denied, you can start a discussion on whether there are any workarounds to this in fedora-extras list. Prefer to leave this review request open till then.
OK its now upto FESCo members to decide about gspca package review. I will not close gspca package review request until i got any feedback. Thanks for replying.
Ping for any watchers. Do we really need kmod as BR for this package. I don't think becuase even if user installed it and he don't have webcam then he will get only errors as uvcview version 0.1.7 Video driver: x11 A window manager is available video /dev/video0 ERROR opening V4L interface : No such file or directory So i don't think gspca kmod should be blocker for this package.
Created attachment 147833 [details] Output of the build
Comment on attachment 147833 [details] Output of the build I cannot compile the source rpm on my fc6 amd64 workstation with a 2.6.20 kernel. See attachement
Updated package Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview-20070107-1.fc7.src.rpm
The update package works fine with the latest standard kernel. Linux thallium 2.6.19-1.2895.fc6 #1 SMP Wed Jan 10 18:50:56 EST 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Just, why did you renamed the binary to uvcview instead of luvcview?
ohh upstream renamed it to luvcview now.
Updated package Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/pnemade/luvcview/luvcview-20070107-2.fc7.src.rpm
CLOSING this Package Review as no one seems to like this package to be included in Fedora. Kindly Don't Mark this Review as DEAD-Review. Thanks.