> On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:38:27AM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:36:01PM +, Paul Brossier wrote:
> > > there is probably a better mean to do so though, ie checking what
> > > type of conversion is needed according to libavcodec, but it does
> > > effectively fixes
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 02:26:41AM +, Paul Brossier wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:38:27AM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> it works perfectly on powerpc, a much nicer solution indeed. and
> the first patch was wrong, the image was slightly more redish.
>
> > Great. We're getting closer, it
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:38:27AM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:36:01PM +, Paul Brossier wrote:
> > there is probably a better mean to do so though, ie checking what
> > type of conversion is needed according to libavcodec, but it does
> > effectively fixes the XV Di
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:36:01PM +, Paul Brossier wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:39:16PM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > Furthermore, it looks obviously buggy. Eg. the little-endian
> > version of the first loop uses values Y[0] and Y[1], while the
> > big-endian variant reuses Y[0] twic
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:39:16PM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 05:41:26PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > I can confirm the XV problem is the same old problem that a patch had
> > been posted for in http://jira.schirmacher.de/jira-kino/browse/KINO-76.
> > I've added
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 05:41:26PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > I can confirm the XV problem is the same old problem that a patch had
> > been posted for in http://jira.schirmacher.de/jira-kino/browse/KINO-76.
> > I've added some #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ around that, the following patch
> > sho
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 15:39 +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
>
> Anyway, what I remember from years ago, Xv did expect image data in
> host-endian format with DRI turned off, and in PCI-endian (little-endian)
> format with DRI turned on.
The expected byte order should be well-defined regardless of w
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 05:41:26PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> I can confirm the XV problem is the same old problem that a patch had
> been posted for in http://jira.schirmacher.de/jira-kino/browse/KINO-76.
> I've added some #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ around that, the following patch
> should finall
No movement. What is sickening is that I even have an iMac I could work
on this, but I am already way overburdened with other tasks. As I like
to remind people, I still have the rest of my life, so I might get
around to it ;-)
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 21:14 -0500, Henry A. Leinhos wrote:
> Hi,
>
> H
hmitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 18:37:52 +0100 (CET)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Michael Schmitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug#289182: kino endianness issues on powerpc
Package: kino
Version: 0.75-2
Severity: serious
kino appears to have
> > I suspect kino declares BE audio data to be LE in the DV export (or indeed
> > any) pipe. No idea what's the cause of the XV and mpeg2enc endianness
> > problems though.
>
> The audio problems seem to be caused (at least) by big-endian length
> fields in an otherwise little-endian WAV file. I'm
Sorry for the late reply; I've been away from my Powerbook (or indeed,
the net) for the last weeks...
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:37:52PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > Severity: serious
>
> Can you please comment on why you think these bugs make kino unsuitable
> for release; specifically, wh
Hi,
I have a debian powerpc available and am ready to help.
The thread you were mentionning is at:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=1699887
I will post my advances to the debian bts. Let me know if you have any
more patches.
cheers, piem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAI
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 10:58:09AM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:59:08PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > You're right that this bug is not a policy violation; this is a "grave" bug,
> > which is the severity for bugs that render a package "unusable or mostly
> > so". We
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:59:08PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> You're right that this bug is not a policy violation; this is a "grave" bug,
> which is the severity for bugs that render a package "unusable or mostly
> so". We should not be releasing unusable binaries for any architecture;
> eith
severity 289182 grave
thanks
Hi Daniel,
You're right that this bug is not a policy violation; this is a "grave" bug,
which is the severity for bugs that render a package "unusable or mostly
so". We should not be releasing unusable binaries for any architecture;
either the binaries for all big-en
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:37:52PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> Severity: serious
Can you please comment on why you think these bugs make kino unsuitable
for release; specifically, which section of policy is violated? I'm not
denying that the bugs you reported are nasty and should be fixed, but
17 matches
Mail list logo
