tytan652
tytan652
> Tested the MR series until #5394 again and we need sth. to prevent clicking the `start virtual camera` multiple times resulting in multiple camera instances. It was grayed out,...
> That doesn't answer the question. Does enabling or outputting to all virtual camera output types (V4L2, PipeWire, whatever) have any kind of performance/resource cost if the user only actually...
I'm waiting for #5377 to be rebased to make some testing.
I fixed an issue. If the first do not start (eg. pkexec canceled for V4L2), the second is now stopped.
> Would it be possible to replace virtualCam and virtualCam2 by the equivalent of an darray? Since the possible limit of simultaneous virtual camera implementation is 2, V4L2 and PipeWire...
Full rework based on #7169. Now the settings is in the VCam config dialog and no more restart is required while changing the implementation. Edit: The option is deleted if...
> Wasn't it decided that all virtualcams should do the same (activate and deactivate at the same time, use the same output etc)? ~~This is a bad idea, allowing any...
Will go for a new re-work without UI and settings change in the near future. Edit: Done
~~The re-work now use every VCam implementation available simultaneously and no more options.~~ ~~Edit: Need to add something to the frontend API.~~
Update and refactor, no more `OBS_OUTPUT_VIRTUALCAM` too much UI-only related.