Please reply to this with the following info <usb vendor code> <bridge & sensor name> <webcam brand & model name>. example: 0c45:627b, with SN9C201 bridge and OV7660 image sensor, found in Thinkpad Z61t
thats it no more. (if you know more details about it, I have created pages, see them for examples and add your webcam info in that manner)
hi mine web cam is in a assembled portable and is a Microdia
0c45:624f, that i did not let work.
i think to have the same sensor, but i don't know how to be sure of
that.
Thanks you
Mrpurple
> hi mine web cam is in a assembled portable and is a Microdia > 0c45:624f, that i did not let work. > i think to have the same sensor, but i don't know how to be sure of > that. > Thanks you > Mrpurple
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: jabega <jbetanz...@gmail.com> Date: Jan 11, 2008 1:11 AM Subject: Re: Lets get to it... To: JoJo jojo <onetwoj...@gmail.com>
Hi : I have a microdia webcam 0c45:6260 SN9C201 OV7670 I have instaled the sn9cxxx_2.09-gutsy-1ubuntu1_i386 pack but no video dev is found. I`ll thanks you a trick for solving the problem. Excuse me about my Enghish.
> Please reply to this with the following info
> <usb vendor code> <bridge & sensor name> <webcam brand & model name>.
> example:
> 0c45:627b, with SN9C201 bridge and OV7660 image sensor, found in Thinkpad Z61t
> thats it no more.
> (if you know more details about it, I have created pages, see them for
> examples and add your webcam info in that manner)
I'm running Fedora 8 on a x86_64 machine and don't have any
programming experience. Nevertheless I'm willing to contribute.
In the spca50x devel-list ( http://lists-archives.org/spca50x-devs/maillist.html ) I read one of them is already trying to figure something out - but
there was no known state of development. Of course i cant find the
mail anymore.
Anyway I noticed that most of us either use a sn9c1xx chip (which should actually already work) or a sn9c201. Collecting data for one single chip is easier than for a whole collection of them - so what data do we currently look for in the usb-snoops?
Get an understanding of USB protocol, get a log from sniffUSB, parse it like mentioned, analyze the parsed log, upload the parsed file and comment on what you did to generate that log, and speculate on what the commands are being sent over, we try to decipher that the commands mean.
-JoJo
On Jan 19, 2008 10:44 PM, Gray Water <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Anyway I noticed that most of us either use a sn9c1xx chip (which should > actually already work) or a sn9c201. Collecting data for one single chip is > easier than for a whole collection of them - so what data do we currently > look for in the usb-snoops?
Just posting this for now but will try to research the image sensor
info later (may I really have to take the device apart?). I assume
the bridge is SN9C201 - Vista wanted to download an update for it...
> Just posting this for now but will try to research the image sensor > info later (may I really have to take the device apart?). I assume > the bridge is SN9C201 - Vista wanted to download an update for it...
I tried with the fc6 version under a vm, but I couldn't get it to
install as it kept complaining about the kernel. Though it could just
be that i'm not used to working with fc... i'm a debian/ubuntu person
myself....
I have a 0c45:6270 Microdia webcam... with one of the older version of
the linux-projects drivers which didn't support my webcam said that my
image sensor was a MT9V111, now i have the current driver which
allegedly supports my camera and it says its an X sensor... ofcourse
the camera still doesn't work...
The sonix driver is GPL'd... doesn't that mean that we should be able
to get the source code for it? I emailed them asking for it... but
nothing so far :p
On Jan 20, 6:17 am, gwater <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Others are reporting MI0360\MT9V111 sensor with your details, from the windows *.inf files. Is that correct?
under VMware you will only get USB 1.1 and never USB 2.0
Did you update the FC6 after installing it in VM?
Forget about Luca's driver, before he givesus any decent drivers, i'm afraid sonix will release better ones ;-) (hmmm, You have the driver from Luca, would you like to share it?)
Yes, it said the .ko was GPL2, I guess thats why Sonix isn't distributing it :-( (they have'nt figures out, how to cleanly seperate GPL from proprietary drivers in kernel like ATI, NVIDIA have)
BTW I noticed that you uploaded the snxcam.ko 1 day after I did the same(double posting?)
-JoJo
On Jan 20, 2008 3:51 PM, zenum <zenum....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I tried with the fc6 version under a vm, but I couldn't get it to > install as it kept complaining about the kernel. Though it could just > be that i'm not used to working with fc... i'm a debian/ubuntu person > myself....
> I have a 0c45:6270 Microdia webcam... with one of the older version of > the linux-projects drivers which didn't support my webcam said that my > image sensor was a MT9V111, now i have the current driver which > allegedly supports my camera and it says its an X sensor... ofcourse > the camera still doesn't work...
> The sonix driver is GPL'd... doesn't that mean that we should be able > to get the source code for it? I emailed them asking for it... but > nothing so far :p
> On Jan 20, 6:17 am, gwater <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > ok thanks, > > ill do that. > > btw anyone ever tried to run the old fc4 driver in a virtual machine > > to see if it works?
> Just posting this for now but will try to research the image sensor > info later (may I really have to take the device apart?). I assume > the bridge is SN9C201 - Vista wanted to download an update for it...
Well, after spending today on reading the pages section those are my questions/thoughts:
there is a module named sn9cxxx in the gspca source [Link<http://microdia.googlegroups.com/web/gspcav1-20071224.tar.gz>] which currently only supports some sn9c1xx webcams as we all know. Since it's being published under GPL I assume they wouldn't be angry if we sent them some lines of code to add to it. I don't think a new driver from scratch is really necessary.
While reading the code (with my 1/2 year of java-training) I found out the driver sends a stream of single bytes to the camera to control it. The single bytes-stream depends on the sensor. Is this correct?
Is it possible to delete all the unnecessary modules(files as well as entries in code in core-source) and make a testing-source consisting of gspca_core.c gspca.h and sn9cxxx.h ?
How comfortable are you with the domain? namely USBSpecs-linuxUSB-git-c-gspca-kernelDrivers-sniffUSB-perl-etc
Yes, gspca is a sound choice, infact when sonix released snxcam.ko for FC6, they did it with gspca & V4L1
Also You may like to take a look at the code/kernel driver for bridge SN9C102, done by Luca Risola?
Looks like we need a GIT host? what say You? (For now you may zip & send the whole directory to me as updates.)
How much time per week can the two of us devote on this? we may do it offline from the group and only send updates & update docs/files, but taking care to document the process for others to join/jump in
-JoJo
On Jan 20, 2008 9:04 PM, Gray Water <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Well, > after spending today on reading the pages section those are my > questions/thoughts:
> there is a module named sn9cxxx in the gspca source [ Link] which currently > only supports some sn9c1xx webcams as we all know. Since it's being > published under GPL I assume they wouldn't be angry if we sent them some > lines of code to add to it. I don't think a new driver from scratch is > really necessary.
> While reading the code (with my 1/2 year of java-training) I found out the > driver sends a stream of single bytes to the camera to control it. The > single bytes-stream depends on the sensor. > Is this correct?
> Is it possible to delete all the unnecessary modules(files as well as > entries in code in core-source) and make a testing-source consisting of > gspca_core.c gspca.h and sn9cxxx.h ?
Im up to it - thats right. I want to use this thing.
My (non-)abilities
I read the pages so I think Im at the edge of understanding usb.
(those sniffs don't seem to be that complicated though its not yet
totally clear to me what they are used for.)
I read most of the spca50x-devel-list-posts refering to sn9cxxx.
I had a half year training in java (just enough to make a computer
print "Hello World" and 5^10). so I think Im able read basic C.
a bit of self-taught python and bash
Im especially not familiar with Object-programming.
Im using linux since fc6 or dapper-ubuntu.
apart from "how to make grub boot a kernel after the fu**-idiot erased
the /boot-partition" the kernel is a mystery to me.
Not the best cv but I think ill get into it quite fast.
Well as long as there are only 2-5 people developing a driver for one
small chip GIT isn't necessary i think.
I could devote a few hours a week (mostly weekendish).
Luca's source looks interesting - it has totally different structure
than gspca. I would think its better we make our driver like gspca -
makes later integration easier.
Lets just open a new discussion and leave this alone for "what chip do
you use". IMO this would be enough documentation. If the driver starts
running we may write some more.
git is distributed, i.e everyone has local access to it. The reason for using it is mainly to attract knowledgeable people who work, in the kernel regularly, plus its what opensource is movingto, and the 2 of us are not in the same room..yada yada yada
The reason luca's code has totally different structure than gspca is because, it "professionally" done. It take good code to get into the kernel. (not to diss. gspca though !)
-JoJo
On Jan 20, 2008 10:17 PM, gwater <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Im up to it - thats right. I want to use this thing.
> My (non-)abilities > I read the pages so I think Im at the edge of understanding usb. > (those sniffs don't seem to be that complicated though its not yet > totally clear to me what they are used for.) > I read most of the spca50x-devel-list-posts refering to sn9cxxx. > I had a half year training in java (just enough to make a computer > print "Hello World" and 5^10). so I think Im able read basic C. > a bit of self-taught python and bash > Im especially not familiar with Object-programming. > Im using linux since fc6 or dapper-ubuntu. > apart from "how to make grub boot a kernel after the fu**-idiot erased > the /boot-partition" the kernel is a mystery to me. > Not the best cv but I think ill get into it quite fast.
> Well as long as there are only 2-5 people developing a driver for one > small chip GIT isn't necessary i think.
> I could devote a few hours a week (mostly weekendish).
> Luca's source looks interesting - it has totally different structure > than gspca. I would think its better we make our driver like gspca - > makes later integration easier.
> Lets just open a new discussion and leave this alone for "what chip do > you use". IMO this would be enough documentation. If the driver starts > running we may write some more.
Hi JoJo,
Not sure about the windows.inf files as I seem to have misplaced my
driver cd, the ones that if I recall correctly work are the sn9c201
drivers from the sonix site.
I've been trying to use VirtualBox which now supports USB2.0 and
VMWare Player (The latest one supports USB2.0) but neither worked
windows or fedora.
The driver I have from Lucas is just the trial one for Gutsy Gibbon, I
could share it but you can just download it from the site for free.
I don't think I double posted the snxcam.ko, my one was compiled for
fc6 and the one before was for fc4... (unless i'm going blind :s)
-Zenum
On Jan 20, 9:53 pm, "JoJo jojo" <onetwoj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Others are reporting MI0360\MT9V111 sensor with your details,
> from the windows *.inf files. Is that correct?
> under VMware you will only get USB 1.1 and never USB 2.0
> Did you update the FC6 after installing it in VM?
> Forget about Luca's driver, before he givesus any decent drivers,
> i'm afraid sonix will release better ones ;-)
> (hmmm, You have the driver from Luca, would you like to share it?)
> Yes, it said the .ko was GPL2, I guess thats why Sonix isn't distributing it :-(
> (they have'nt figures out, how to cleanly seperate GPL from
> proprietary drivers in kernel
> like ATI, NVIDIA have)
> BTW I noticed that you uploaded the snxcam.ko 1 day after I did the
> same(double posting?)
> -JoJo
> On Jan 20, 2008 3:51 PM, zenum <zenum....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I tried with the fc6 version under a vm, but I couldn't get it to
> > install as it kept complaining about the kernel. Though it could just
> > be that i'm not used to working with fc... i'm a debian/ubuntu person
> > myself....
> > I have a 0c45:6270 Microdia webcam... with one of the older version of
> > the linux-projects drivers which didn't support my webcam said that my
> > image sensor was a MT9V111, now i have the current driver which
> > allegedly supports my camera and it says its an X sensor... ofcourse
> > the camera still doesn't work...
> > The sonix driver is GPL'd... doesn't that mean that we should be able
> > to get the source code for it? I emailed them asking for it... but
> > nothing so far :p
> > On Jan 20, 6:17 am, gwater <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > ok thanks,
> > > ill do that.
> > > btw anyone ever tried to run the old fc4 driver in a virtual machine
> > > to see if it works?
> Hi JoJo, > Not sure about the windows.inf files as I seem to have misplaced my > driver cd, the ones that if I recall correctly work are the sn9c201 > drivers from the sonix site. > I've been trying to use VirtualBox which now supports USB2.0 and > VMWare Player (The latest one supports USB2.0) but neither worked > windows or fedora. > The driver I have from Lucas is just the trial one for Gutsy Gibbon, I > could share it but you can just download it from the site for free. > I don't think I double posted the snxcam.ko, my one was compiled for > fc6 and the one before was for fc4... (unless i'm going blind :s)
> -Zenum
> On Jan 20, 9:53 pm, "JoJo jojo" <onetwoj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Zenum
> > Others are reporting MI0360\MT9V111 sensor with your details, > > from the windows *.inf files. Is that correct?
> > under VMware you will only get USB 1.1 and never USB 2.0
> > Did you update the FC6 after installing it in VM?
> > Forget about Luca's driver, before he givesus any decent drivers, > > i'm afraid sonix will release better ones ;-) > > (hmmm, You have the driver from Luca, would you like to share it?)
> > Yes, it said the .ko was GPL2, I guess thats why Sonix isn't distributing it :-( > > (they have'nt figures out, how to cleanly seperate GPL from > > proprietary drivers in kernel > > like ATI, NVIDIA have)
> > BTW I noticed that you uploaded the snxcam.ko 1 day after I did the > > same(double posting?)
> > -JoJo
> > On Jan 20, 2008 3:51 PM, zenum <zenum....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I tried with the fc6 version under a vm, but I couldn't get it to > > > install as it kept complaining about the kernel. Though it could just > > > be that i'm not used to working with fc... i'm a debian/ubuntu person > > > myself....
> > > I have a 0c45:6270 Microdia webcam... with one of the older version of > > > the linux-projects drivers which didn't support my webcam said that my > > > image sensor was a MT9V111, now i have the current driver which > > > allegedly supports my camera and it says its an X sensor... ofcourse > > > the camera still doesn't work...
> > > The sonix driver is GPL'd... doesn't that mean that we should be able > > > to get the source code for it? I emailed them asking for it... but > > > nothing so far :p
> > > On Jan 20, 6:17 am, gwater <grewa...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > ok thanks, > > > > ill do that. > > > > btw anyone ever tried to run the old fc4 driver in a virtual machine > > > > to see if it works?
|
