On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 10:14:39AM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 10/11/2020 9:12 AM, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Andreas Rheinhardt (2020-10-09 16:36:27) > >> Anton Khirnov: > >>> Those are private fields, no reason to have them exposed in a public > >>> header. > >>> --- > >>> libavdevice/v4l2.c | 2 +- > >> > >> This is a problem: There is no requirement to update libavdevice at the > >> same time as libavformat; one might use a newer version of libavformat > >> together with an older version of libavdevice. This effectively makes > >> the offsets of all the fields accessed by libavdevice avpriv, regardless > >> of whether they are in AVStream or AVStreamInternal. > > > > Right. I wish avdevice was either purged from earth or merged into lavf, > > Merging it into lavf is for that matter the only proper way to remove > avdevice_register_all() while also maintaining the ability to select an > outdev in functions like av_guess_format(). So i wouldn't be against it.
The situation with a single API+ABI shared by 2 libs with their own soname is bad. lavd either needs an independant API thats designed for devices (which is probably more a medium to long term effort) OR lavd should be merged with lavf (as suggested) so i agree such a merge seems like the best choice thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB It is what and why we do it that matters, not just one of them.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
