On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 07:58:46PM +0200, Markus Hennecke wrote: > Jacob Meuser wrote: > > >for that matter, who uses the SDL flavor? how and why? afaik, newer > >mplayer should be just as capable and fast at video rendering, and > >there should be no need to use SDL for audio. > > I do. It works reasonable fast on a non accelerated X (radeon without xv > support)
is '-vo sdl' really any more efficient than '-vo x11'? please try with the newly updated mplayer. the libswscale conversions should be as good as, if not better than, what's in SDL. actually, even the mplayer-1.0rc2 packages have libswscale enabled, iirc, though that version was fairly "young". if there's no Xv support, SDL is using "plain" X11, just like -vo x11. SDL does have efficient converters/ scalers, which mplayer used to not have, but does these days. > to play videos and SDL audio comes in handy while watching > DVDs. The sndio driver won't play some formats AFAIR. mplayer decodes whatever format is on the DVD to PCM before sending it to the audio backends. mplayer also downmixes everything to at most 2 channels by default. you have to tell it not to downmix. so the backends always get 16-bit stereo signed linear, 48 or 96 kH sample rate when playing DVDs. there are only so many valid DVD audio formats. I really don't see how the SDL backend could work for a DVD and the sndio backend couldn't. otoh, introducing SDL's event loop for video playback could have been messing something up, that got fixed when using SDL audio. maybe, I dunno. -- [email protected] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
