[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] define _BSD_SOURCE for bktr.c

Diego Biurrun diego
Sun Dec 14 14:31:32 CET 2008

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:03:08PM +0000, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:16:45PM +0100, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:54:29PM +0000, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Oh silly me, it actually works right in the regression tests, I forgot
> > > > to add -r when trying it on the command-line, so that part is okay.
> > > > The LD_LIBRARY_PATH is just to allow make test without installing first,
> > > > but it's not portable (e.g. won't work on Windows).
> > > 
> > > and did I submit this to you guys?  no.  why?  because it's not
> > > for upstream inclusion.  so why bother saying it's not portable
> > > to Windows?
> > 
> > Well, because there is a lot of other stuff you did not submit but is
> > necessary to make ffmpeg work on OpenBSD and acceptable.
> > So we have to find out ourselves which parts are good and which are not,
> > and I made clear that one isn't. In particular, it was not directed at
> > you. And in particular 2) I felt the need to say it because I would have
> > considered such a thing useful in the past too, but decided it to be a
> > bad idea, in particular because of that.

Also, there might well be a solution that is portable to OpenBSD as well
as to Windows.  It might take more effort, but it's not impossible to
make everybody happy.

> > > I dropped maintainership of ffmpeg because of all this needless
> > > bashing.  I hope you don't get an onslaught of idiots trying to
> > > make ffmpeg work on OpenBSD ...
> > 
> > I'm sorry if you do not like it, but the current OpenBSD patches
> > IMHO certainly do not qualify as a "good" way of making it work,
> > and if you truly think of most of them as more as quick-and-dirty hacks
> > I don't think it can get that much worse.
> > Still, bashing certainly was not even remotely the intention, getting
> > things fixed was, a bit of bashing just makes all these workarounds a
> > bit less annoying.
> I have tried bringing up many of these issues in the past.  I was
> told to fix OpenBSD.  I tried.  I got gmake updated.

Very good, that did everybody a favor.

> maybe the way I was doing things wasn't quite the best, but there
> was no review, just bashing.
> and now I'm being told I never did anything.  that's pretty insulting.

I can understand some of your frustration, but please also understand

Almost every downstream distributor of FFmpeg patches it in more or less
extensive ways.  And most of the times, when we look at those patches,
we find that they are unnecessary or can be done in better ways.

When the Debian FFmpeg package was taken over by Reinhard Tartler it
carried about a dozen patches.  I looked at them together with Reinhard
and within a very short time only one patch was left.  Most could be
dropped, a few got applied and others got implemented differently,
mostly just hours after we were notified of the issues.

IMO the ultimate goal should always be to send everything upstream and
apply no patches.  It's not an impossible goal and it leads to better
quality software and less work and frustration for everybody involved.

And yes, the Debian OpenSSL disaster is a shining example of how things
can go wrong if this aim is disregarded.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list