Author Topic: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?  (Read 4128 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DiTBhoTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3911
  • Country: gb
Re: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?
« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2022, 07:50:41 pm »
so, this damn thing still doesn't work
I have prepared a new profile in which opengl and egl have been eliminated completely
Code: [Select]
libepoxy-1.5.9-r1  no-egl*
mesa-22.0.0  no-egl*
libcaca-0.99_beta19-r8  no-opengl*
libwebp-1.2.2  no-opengl*
ffmpeg-4.4.1-r4  no-opengl*

so now, the only option for vlc is --vout x11, which sadly doesn't work yet
I'll just focus on this

idea, suggestions, etc ... let me know  :-//
« Last Edit: April 03, 2022, 07:54:08 pm by DiTBho »
The opposite of courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow
 

Offline ve7xen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1192
  • Country: ca
    • VE7XEN Blog
Re: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?
« Reply #26 on: April 04, 2022, 07:32:36 pm »
I'm confused. You initially were talking about fbdev, but now you want it to work on a remote X server? Which is it, they are very different problems...

What's your end goal here? If you just want to play video on an embedded display, writing directly to fbdev seems like the obvious solution. Or if your platform includes OpenGL hardware, that will get you better performance. I wouldn't bother with X at all. I am not sure about VLC's implementation, but EGL should in theory enable this without X.

I don't think the existence of the OpenGL libraries is your problem. You can always choose an alternate --vout, and the defaults have a lot of fallbacks AIUI. The problem seems to be that you don't have a working underliyng mechanism to display the video.

Trying to get video working well over a remote X session is probably pretty much a non-starter, but I also don't see why this would be needed in an embedded system.
73 de VE7XEN
He/Him
 

Offline DiTBhoTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3911
  • Country: gb
Re: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?
« Reply #27 on: April 04, 2022, 08:03:06 pm »
What's your end goal here?

The goal is to have that bloody vlc working on the SCB, and there are only options
- fbdev directly
- x11 locally on the same SBC
- x11 remotely exported to MobaXterm

forget opengl and egl, I only tried them because none of the above work even on the mac-mini/x86, which has the same profile of the SBC

So, I need to use vlc with --vout x11, it's not clear why it doesn't work remotely.
I haven't yet tried locally.

if your platform includes OpenGL hardware

The SCB doesn't have any OpenGL hardware, only a simple framebuffer

The problem seems to be that you don't have a working underliyng mechanism to display the video.

Exactly what? XCB? or what-else?
xterm, xclock work on the SBC exporting the display on Mobaxterm

The opposite of courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow
 

Offline DiTBhoTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3911
  • Country: gb
Re: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?
« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2022, 08:08:43 pm »
Quote
xcb_x11 vout display error: shared memory (MIT-SHM) not available

To me, it seems vlc --vout is only able to run locally, it cannot work remotely if it tries to use shared-memory
That error message is the only thing returned.

Are you able to run vlc --vout remotely?
The opposite of courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow
 

Offline ve7xen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1192
  • Country: ca
    • VE7XEN Blog
Re: vlc on a simple framebuffer: is it possible?
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2022, 08:43:34 pm »
Quote
xcb_x11 vout display error: shared memory (MIT-SHM) not available

To me, it seems vlc --vout is only able to run locally, it cannot work remotely if it tries to use shared-memory
That error message is the only thing returned.

Are you able to run vlc --vout remotely?

Yeah remote video over X11 is going to be difficult to get working reliably if it's even possible. This depends on the capabilities of the X server (the host with the display) though, and only tangentially related to your SBC. I don't have a networked X server handy to play with this.

If the remote video is just for dev purposes, it's a bit of a red herring as it doesn't really tell you anything about getting video working on the SBC itself; it is trying to render the video directly on the remote X server. Work on the actual hardware and I suspect the X11 output driver will work. Running directly on the fb console should work too.
73 de VE7XEN
He/Him
 
The following users thanked this post: DiTBho


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf