On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 08:28:40PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:55:59 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 05:59:32PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:34:15 +0100
> > > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:55:59 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 05:59:32PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:34:15 +0100
> > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:48:01AM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 03:34:27 +010
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 05:59:32PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:34:15 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:48:01AM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 03:34:27 +0100
> > > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:34:15 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:48:01AM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 03:34:27 +0100
> > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:51:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > > > On 12/11/2016 10:29 PM, M
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:48:01AM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 03:34:27 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:51:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > > On 12/11/2016 10:29 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, Ja
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 03:34:27 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:51:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > On 12/11/2016 10:29 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > >> On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niederma
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 10:51:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/11/2016 10:29 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> >> On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote
On 12/11/2016 10:29 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
>> On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> [...]
>
>
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> >> On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
[...]
> > And also theres more work for us to maintain seperate i
Le primidi 21 frimaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> As long as it is not documented that you need to run libavcodec/format
> in a seperate process it is a security issue if you crash.
This is not specific to FFmpeg and documented in books and courses on
development in general.
> iam
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 04:06:00PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le primidi 21 frimaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > Its explained in the patch comment above
> >
> > max_pixels should to be backported as it allows users to control memory
> > use from large images better, avoid som
On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 16:06:41 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 04:02:27PM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 01:54:28PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:04
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 04:02:27PM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 01:54:28PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> >> On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:04 +0100
> >> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>
> >> > When we will backport this,
Le primidi 21 frimaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> Its explained in the patch comment above
>
> max_pixels should to be backported as it allows users to control memory
> use from large images better, avoid some OOMs and fixes issues which
> some people consider security bugs
> if it
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 01:54:28PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:04 +0100
>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>
>> > When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
>> > in AVCodecContext in each r
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 01:54:28PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:04 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
> > in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
> > use the same soname
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:04 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
> in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
> use the same soname though and must have a binary compatible interface.
> It thus ca
On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
>> On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
>>> in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0,
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
> > in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
> > use the same soname though an
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
> > in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
> > use the same soname though an
On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
> in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
> use the same soname though and must have a binary compatible interface.
> It thus can only saftely
When we will backport this, it will be inevitably in a different location
in AVCodecContext in each release and master. 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and master
use the same soname though and must have a binary compatible interface.
It thus can only saftely be accessed through AVOptions
It may be enough to requir
22 matches
Mail list logo