> On 24 May 2016, at 17:01, Mark Thompson <s...@jkqxz.net> wrote: > > On 13/04/16 09:18, nablet developer wrote: >> Signed-off-by: nablet developer <s...@nablet.com> >> --- >> libavcodec/qsv.c | 35 +--------------------------- >> libavcodec/qsv_internal.h | 5 ---- >> libavcodec/qsvdec.c | 1 + >> libavcodec/qsvenc.c | 1 + >> libavutil/Makefile | 1 + >> libavutil/qsv_internal.c | 58 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> libavutil/qsv_internal.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 7 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 libavutil/qsv_internal.c >> create mode 100644 libavutil/qsv_internal.h >> >> diff --git a/libavutil/qsv_internal.h b/libavutil/qsv_internal.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..de00d09 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/libavutil/qsv_internal.h >> ... >> +/** >> + * Convert a libmfx error code into a ffmpeg error code. >> + */ >> +int ff_qsv_error(int mfx_err); > > This fails for non-static builds because of the namespace prefix (try building > the shared libraries).
oh, good catch, thanks. I think function then should be called "avpriv_qsv_error" according to the https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Naming-conventions <https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Naming-conventions>, right? I will also test my further changes with shared builds starting from now (I was using instructions from https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/Centos <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/Centos> which were for static build). > > Does this function really need to be available everywhere? I think you should > wait until you have other patches which actually require it to so that this > change can be assessed properly. In isolation, it is not useful. hm, if my other patches will depend on this patch, how can they be applied before this change? I am actually following advice from https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Submitting-patches-1 <https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Submitting-patches-1> to split patches into small self-contained pieces. please advice how to proceed. > > Also, you should have a look at your mail setup. This arrived today dated six > weeks ago - either it has taken unreasonably long to arrive or something > strange > is going on at your sending machine. e-mail was sent today - I was using CentOS development virtual machine which had no ntp installed, now it's corrected. sorry for the inconveniences. > > Thanks, > > - Mark > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
