New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

stop_recording() stops recordings on other splitter_ports #136

Closed
standesalpes opened this Issue Aug 2, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@standesalpes

standesalpes commented Aug 2, 2014

Hi,
It looks that stop_recoding() called on a specific splitter port blocks processing on other ports.
In the example below I would expect about 30 'ok' lines, but I get only 4, i.e. stop_recording on port 2 blocks the recording on port 1.
Note that the camera instance considers that port 1 is still used for recording.
I'm running firmware 700, and picamera version 1.6-1.
Cheers,
Stan

import picamera

class Output():
    def write(self, b):
        print('ok')

with picamera.PiCamera() as camera:
    camera.resolution = (1296, 972)
    camera.framerate = 1
    camera.start_recording(Output(), format='h264')
    camera.start_recording('/dev/null', format='h264', splitter_port=2)
    camera.wait_recording(3)
    camera.stop_recording(splitter_port=2)
    camera.wait_recording(30)
    camera.stop_recording()
@waveform80

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@waveform80

waveform80 Aug 2, 2014

Owner

Confirmed. This looks awfully similar to #105 but I thought I'd fixed that ... I'll look into this for 1.7

Owner

waveform80 commented Aug 2, 2014

Confirmed. This looks awfully similar to #105 but I thought I'd fixed that ... I'll look into this for 1.7

@waveform80 waveform80 added the bug label Aug 2, 2014

@waveform80 waveform80 added this to the 1.7 milestone Aug 2, 2014

@waveform80 waveform80 self-assigned this Aug 2, 2014

@waveform80

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@waveform80

waveform80 Aug 2, 2014

Owner

Oh, and before I forget: many thanks for a well written bug report - I really appreciate it when people give me a code snippet that I can immediately test with a simple copy'n'paste!

Owner

waveform80 commented Aug 2, 2014

Oh, and before I forget: many thanks for a well written bug report - I really appreciate it when people give me a code snippet that I can immediately test with a simple copy'n'paste!

@waveform80

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@waveform80

waveform80 Aug 2, 2014

Owner

Oh dear - looks like this has been broken for ages; even the change for #105 didn't fix things, just left it equally broken. Still, looks like it shouldn't be too hard to fix (I'm just debating the cleanest way to deal with it at the moment). Note to self: remember to add proper tests for this - the existing multi-res tests are just testing for valid output, not length of output (use a custom output to test length? Probably easiest...)

Owner

waveform80 commented Aug 2, 2014

Oh dear - looks like this has been broken for ages; even the change for #105 didn't fix things, just left it equally broken. Still, looks like it shouldn't be too hard to fix (I'm just debating the cleanest way to deal with it at the moment). Note to self: remember to add proper tests for this - the existing multi-res tests are just testing for valid output, not length of output (use a custom output to test length? Probably easiest...)

@waveform80 waveform80 closed this in c13ec55 Aug 2, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment