Comment 7 for bug 46393

dv1394 does not implement the camera control protocol. libavc1394, which uses raw1394 does. Why? Well, it is a matter of these being different protocol from differing standards bodies and the history of their implementations. It is still possible to capture and export when all you have access to is dv1394 by manually controlling the device. However, usage of dv1394 is not as friendly when you have more than one 1394 interface on the system.

Still, having access to raw1394 is much nicer, and most users will prefer it. Has it not occurred to anyone else but me that you can create a _new_ grouped named "raw1394" ?!

Finally, in the other bug, I suggested Ubuntu follow the dv1394 naming convention as established on linux1394.org FAQ topic on udev. This also affords some backwards compatibility with Debian kernel 2.4 and it did not use devfs and setup dv1394 as /dev/dv1394/%n.