> On Sep 9, 2015, at 14:51, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>
> Hendrik Schreiber tagtraum.com> writes:
>
>> Attached patch for the libavcodec Makefile fixed it.
>
> Pushed the second hunk with a new commit message.
Thank you.
-hendrik
___
ffmpeg-devel ma
Hendrik Schreiber tagtraum.com> writes:
> Attached patch for the libavcodec Makefile fixed it.
Pushed the second hunk with a new commit message.
Thank you, Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/lis
Hey there,
just tried to build the brand new 2.8 with
--enable-small --enable-shared --enable-static --disable-programs --disable-doc
--disable-avfilter --disable-postproc --disable-swscale --disable-avdevice
--disable-filters
--disable-decoder=h26*,msmpeg*,mpeg2*,mpeg4*,mpeg_vdpau,mpeg_xvmc,
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 02:52:34PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 04:28:41AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
> > if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
> > some revission prior to the n
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 07:22:15PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:23:18PM +0200, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > > Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes:
> > >
> > >> I intend to make 2.8 within the next 1-2 days
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:23:18PM +0200, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes:
> >
> >> I intend to make 2.8 within the next 1-2 days or so
> >> from the release/2.8 branch
> >
> > I cannot judge if the sample req
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes:
>
>> I intend to make 2.8 within the next 1-2 days or so
>> from the release/2.8 branch
>
> I cannot judge if the sample request as described
> in ticket #4826 is still useful.
>
I think it should be re
Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes:
> I intend to make 2.8 within the next 1-2 days or so
> from the release/2.8 branch
I cannot judge if the sample request as described
in ticket #4826 is still useful.
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmp
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 04:28:41AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
> release from that, after testing
> if you
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> On 31.08.2015 14:55, compn wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:19:02 +0200
>> Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>>> On 31.08.2015 01:29, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> Before the r
On 31.08.2015 14:55, compn wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:19:02 +0200
> Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> On 31.08.2015 01:29, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
>>> wrote:
Before the release we should decide what to do with the asf_o
demuxer. Sinc
On 31.08.2015 14:47, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Andreas Cadhalpun googlemail.com> writes:
>
>>> Was the question about the release branch or about
>>> master?
>>
>> Primarily about the release branch.
>
> Then I suggest you remove the demuxer from the
> release branch,
That could be done, if n
compn mi.rr.com> writes:
> if only we could also also import asf demuxer
> from vlc...
Do you have an asf sample that works with vlc
but fails with FFmpeg?
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/l
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:19:02 +0200
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> Hi Hendrik,
>
> On 31.08.2015 01:29, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
> > wrote:
> >> Before the release we should decide what to do with the asf_o
> >> demuxer. Since it still crashes of
Andreas Cadhalpun googlemail.com> writes:
> > Was the question about the release branch or about
> > master?
>
> Primarily about the release branch.
Then I suggest you remove the demuxer from the
release branch, I think LAV does not use releases.
Or does it?
Carl Eugen
_
Hi Carl Eugen,
On 31.08.2015 08:31, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> Does someone want to keep it?
>
> Was the question about the release branch or about
> master?
Primarily about the release branch.
I wouldn't want to be responsible for security support
of t
Hi Hendrik,
On 31.08.2015 01:29, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
> wrote:
>> Before the release we should decide what to do with the asf_o demuxer.
>> Since it still crashes often, it's probably best to just remove it.
>>
>> Does someone want to keep i
On 31.08.2015 00:40, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 8/30/15, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 29.08.2015 04:28, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>>> some revission prior to the next API bump a
wm4 googlemail.com> writes:
> It's been said multiple times: the old code is
> terrible, while the new demuxer's code is actually
> maintainable.
Ok (I don't agree, but let's assume that for a moment):
But who is maintaining it?
Who is going through the user reports on trac and
fixing the iss
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 09:04:46 + (UTC)
Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Seconds. The way seeking works in my app is that when
> > user wants to seek to positon X, then the reference
> > clock is set to X, and if the demuxer seeks to a
> > wrong position, t
Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
> Seconds. The way seeking works in my app is that when
> user wants to seek to positon X, then the reference
> clock is set to X, and if the demuxer seeks to a
> wrong position, then it either has to read and decode
> a lot of frames until X is reached (whi
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Here is sample that seeks quite badly with the old
>> demuxer, in playback it takes several seconds for the
>> seek to catch up properly,
>
> (Seconds or milliseconds? I can reproduce the issue
> w
Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
> Here is sample that seeks quite badly with the old
> demuxer, in playback it takes several seconds for the
> seek to catch up properly,
(Seconds or milliseconds? I can reproduce the issue
with time but not visually...)
> because it seeks to an absolutely
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Seeking is broken with many more files with the old
>> demuxer, in fact thats the most common complaint I got
>> about asf with the old demuxer, seeking doesn't work.
>
> Could you point me to an e
Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
> Please report or fix crashes
Weren't most reports ignored so far?
I ask because from a quick look, one of a dozen
samples in trac was fixed.
Or do I miss something?
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg
Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
> Seeking is broken with many more files with the old
> demuxer, in fact thats the most common complaint I got
> about asf with the old demuxer, seeking doesn't work.
Could you point me to an example?
> The new one improves seeking quite substantially on
>
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
>
>> > Does someone want to keep it?
>
> Was the question about the release branch or about
> master?
>
>> Yes, I want to keep it. It works much better for
>> me than the old one.
>
> All LAV users use t
Hendrik Leppkes gmail.com> writes:
> > Does someone want to keep it?
Was the question about the release branch or about
master?
> Yes, I want to keep it. It works much better for
> me than the old one.
All LAV users use the new demuxer?
Isn't seeking broken for many files?
Can you point me
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29.08.2015 04:28, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
>>
On 8/29/15, wm4 wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 04:28:41 +0200
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
>> release from
On 8/30/15, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29.08.2015 04:28, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
>> release from that, aft
Hi,
On 29.08.2015 04:28, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
> release from that, after testing
> if you want something in the relea
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 04:40:29PM +, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer niedermayer.cc> writes:
>
> > if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8
> > from some revission prior to the next API bump and will
> > then make a 2.8 release from that, after testing
>
> P
On 8/29/2015 7:56 AM, wm4 wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 04:28:41 +0200
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
>> re
Michael Niedermayer niedermayer.cc> writes:
> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8
> from some revission prior to the next API bump and will
> then make a 2.8 release from that, after testing
Please do so.
Will you commit your framerate filter?
Carl Eugen
__
On 8/29/15, wm4 wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 04:28:41 +0200
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
>> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
>> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
>> release from
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 04:28:41 +0200
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
> release from that, after testing
The release
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
> if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
> some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
> release from that, after testing
> if you want so
Hi all
Its about 2 and a half month since 2.7
if there are no objections then ill branch of release/2.8 from
some revission prior to the next API bump and will then make a 2.8
release from that, after testing
if you want something in the release, push it prior to the bump OR
cherry pick it in rele
39 matches
Mail list logo
