On 01/11/17 00:17, Mark Thompson wrote: > On 01/11/17 00:07, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >> 2017-11-01 1:04 GMT+01:00 Mark Thompson <s...@jkqxz.net>: >>> This is why I'm concerned that we are facilitating anti-open >>> behaviour from Nvidia by making it easier to use the >>> closed software than more open alternatives. >> >> But you do agree that there is nothing "open" about the AMD >> driver in question? > > True. Neither the AMF nor libmfx drivers are really any better, though they > don't have the same silly hoops for the user to jump through (they have > different ones, though, especially for libmfx). On the other hand, the open > VAAPI and VDPAU drivers are to some degree, and V4L2 could be (I'm unsure on > V4L2, I've never investigated the actual implementations behind any of them).
Or libx264, which also lacks headers inside ffmpeg. (We could dynamically load libx264 using reverse-enginereed non-GPL headers and then be able to enable it everywhere! How useful!) - Mark _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
