On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 05:40:00PM +0800, Agatha Hu wrote:
[...]
> Yes we plan to work on base of nvenc.c, libnvenc.patch is sent for
> comparison.
>
I see, then it's fine. Thank you :)
--
Clément B.
pgpQkRk7b_EBC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
On 2014/12/29 22:10, Clément Bœsch wrote:
I hope you understand that this patch is likely to get rejected for several
reasons. Here is a (probably) non exhaustive list:
- There are still some license uncertainties about the licensing (see
"die_license_disabled nonfree nvenc" in the config
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 03:29:55PM +0800, Agatha Hu wrote:
> On 2014/12/20 16:14, Philip Langdale wrote:
> >
> >I found two specific problems while testing the original patch and I
> >put together fixes for them, but I don't have acces to the machine with
> >the diffs until the 5th of Jan (whoops)
Agatha Hu nvidia.com> writes:
> And I updated the patch
> - - - / d e v / n u l l
> + + + b / l i b a v c o d e c / l i b n v e n c . h
> @ @ - 0 , 0 + 1 , 1 4 2 @ @
> + / *
> + * N V E N C w r a p p e r h e a d e r
I don't understand:
Why are you sending your wrapper libr
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 03:29:55PM +0800, Agatha Hu wrote:
> On 2014/12/20 16:14, Philip Langdale wrote:
> >
> >I found two specific problems while testing the original patch and I
> >put together fixes for them, but I don't have acces to the machine with
> >the diffs until the 5th of Jan (whoops)
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:35:05 +0800
ahu wrote:
>
> Ok thanks for the advice. I attached the libnvenc patch without
> changing Timo's work.
> There's a README.txt, explaining the patch structure and system
> requirement.
I found two specific problems while testing the original patch and I
put tog
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 01:35:05PM +0800, ahu wrote:
[...]
> configure| 11
> doc/examples/Makefile|1
> doc/examples/libnvenc.c | 198 +
> ffmpeg.c |2
> libavcodec/Makefile |1
> libavcodec/allcodecs.c
On 12/17/2014 10:20 PM, compn wrote:> On Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:34:56 +
> Agatha Hu wrote:
>> We've almost finished the license part in our patch and plan to
>> commit to ffmpeg community, but we found ffmpeg add Timo's nvenc
>> patch days ago, so our patch is incompatible with the TOT version.
On 12/17/2014 10:11 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> compn mi.rr.com> writes:
>
>>> Should we (1)Add libnvenc on TOT branch but without
>>> changing Timo's work or (2)Change nvenc on TOT
>>> branch like an incremental patch on Timo's work. In
>>> fact I would prefer (1), as it requires less work.
compn mi.rr.com> writes:
> > Should we (1)Add libnvenc on TOT branch but without
> > changing Timo's work or (2)Change nvenc on TOT
> > branch like an incremental patch on Timo's work. In
> > fact I would prefer (1), as it requires less work.
>
> probably (1) for now.
Isn't that the worst-ca
On Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:34:56 +
Agatha Hu wrote:
> We've almost finished the license part in our patch and plan to
> commit to ffmpeg community, but we found ffmpeg add Timo's nvenc
> patch days ago, so our patch is incompatible with the TOT version.
> Should we (1)Add libnvenc on TOT branch bu
On 2014-12-17 01:34, Agatha Hu wrote:
Repost
-Original Message-
From: Agatha Hu
Sent: 2014年12月17日 15:49
To: 'Philip Langdale'; 'ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org'
Cc: Abhijit Patait; Eric Young; Jaime Ieong; Andrew Fear; Stephen
Warren; Andy Ritger
Subject: RE: ffmpeg nvenc
Hi Phil,
We've almost
Repost
-Original Message-
From: Agatha Hu
Sent: 2014年12月17日 15:49
To: 'Philip Langdale'; 'ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org'
Cc: Abhijit Patait; Eric Young; Jaime Ieong; Andrew Fear; Stephen Warren; Andy
Ritger
Subject: RE: ffmpeg nvenc
Hi Phil,
We've almost finished the license part in our patc
13 matches
Mail list logo
