On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:10:48PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 3/3/2018 6:41 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 08:16:11AM +0800, Jun Zhao wrote: > >> > > > >> bitstream_filters.texi | 11 ++++++----- > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >> 27c05404d9fabe5065e418c4cc09629d53aee1a1 > >> 0001-doc-bitstream_filters-correct-dump_extra-bsfs-docs.patch > >> From 0a0a10824511ef9d5b3c49ee652a918603841826 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> From: Jun Zhao <jun.z...@intel.com> > >> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:53:05 +0800 > >> Subject: [PATCH V2] doc/bitstream_filters: correct dump_extra bsfs docs. > >> > >> Update dump_extra bit stream filter docs to follow current > >> code implement. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jun Zhao <jun.z...@intel.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Steven Liu <l...@onvideo.cn> > >> --- > >> doc/bitstream_filters.texi | 11 ++++++----- > >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > i hoped a little that the a option could one day be > > cleanly restored in the implementation. > > but keeping the docs incorrect is not helping > > You mean adding it as it's defined in the removed portion of the doxy > from this patch (local_header flag2)? > Sounds like a better idea, as it would help replace the > av_parser_change() call in ffmpeg.c with this bsf. I'll take a look.
yes [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB If you think the mosad wants you dead since a long time then you are either wrong or dead since a long time.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
