Michel Bardiaux wrote: > Ramiro Polla wrote: >> Ramiro Polla wrote: >>> Michel Bardiaux wrote: >>>> M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: >>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>> That said, I don't like the design of the grabbing code at all. >>>>> IMHO it would >>>>> be much cleaner to simply run ffmpeg -f v4l2 -i /dev/video0 or >>>>> whatever, >>>>> dropping the whole concept of a default grabbing device used if no >>>>> input is >>>>> specified. >>>>> >>>> FWIW I agree. >>>> >>> Me too =). >>> >>> The code for using a default grabbing device is really buggy (the >>> grabbing interfaces depend on what has been set for output). >> It seems this would be just removing a bunch of redundant code (like >> Michael said), and making few adaptations to the existing -i code. >> One problem with -i <grab device> is when you want to use the default >> grab device. This could be accomplished by (some suggestions): >> a) using the '-' character > > Please dont, '-' generally means stdin. AAMOF ffmpeg -i - < > /dev/video0 *should* work as expected. > Generally as in POSIX programs, or FFmpeg? (Sorry to ask. I searched a little, but it's quite hard to google for "-") >> b) making -grab mean -i <default device>. > > Why do you insist on having a default grab device? > First I wanted to set the default grab *format* (as is what currently happens in FFmpeg). Now I'm talking about default grab *device*. It would be nice to have default devices since most grab interfaces have a widely used device (like /dev/bktr0, /dev/tuner0, /dev/video0...) And for the VFW grab interface I'm writing, the devices are set by a number (0-9), 0 meaning default. Ramiro Polla
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4