On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 02:53:37PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Michael Niedermayer
> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 08:39:00AM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> >> FATE is non-interactive; it should not listen to user commands
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanaga...@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >> tests/fate-run.sh | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/fate-run.sh b/tests/fate-run.sh
> >> index b88730a..7aa5df2 100755
> >> --- a/tests/fate-run.sh
> >> +++ b/tests/fate-run.sh
> >> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ probeframes(){
> >>
> >> ffmpeg(){
> >> dec_opts="-hwaccel $hwaccel -threads $threads -thread_type
> >> $thread_type"
> >> - ffmpeg_args="-nostats -cpuflags $cpuflags"
> >> + ffmpeg_args="-nostdin -nostats -cpuflags $cpuflags"
> >
> > This is not neccessary and its not how FFmpeg is used by the majority
> > of users scripts AFAIK.
>
> >
> > I dont mind if fate tests "-nostdin" but it also should test the case
> > without "-nostdin" as thats likely how its used most of the time
>
> What does testing without -nostdin add?
> Can you give a concrete example of where by applying this patch the
> quality/utility
> of ffmpeg's FATE environment is being reduced?
>
> I am not so sure that the majority of users' scripts use -nostats either.> Applying the same logic, FATE should test without the -nostats flag as well. fate should probably run (seperate) tests with alot more flag combinations [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Let us carefully observe those good qualities wherein our enemies excel us and endeavor to excel them, by avoiding what is faulty, and imitating what is excellent in them. -- Plutarch
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
