[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Implement pixdesc.h:write_line()
Thu Apr 2 01:27:18 CEST 2009
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 12:02:34AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> Hi all.
> Formats when possible have been tested with the vf_pixdesc_test
> filter, included the monowhite and monoblack formats, with something
> ffplay in.avi -vfilters "format=gray,pixdesc_test"
> Some formats cannot be tested this way, for example all the formats
> not supported as output by sws, anyway I think that it's quite safe to
> apply it anyway.
> Many interesting problems remains opened, for example:
> * How are we supposed to deal with HW accelerated pixel formats? Are
> we supposed to add an entry in the pixdescs arrays for each of them?
> * It's not clear which should be the interaction between lsws and
> the pixdescs.
> Currently lsws doesn't depend on lavc, since the pixfmt descriptors
> may and should be used in libsws to avoid code duplication
> (e.g. sws_format_name()), we may either add lavc to the lsws
> dependancies *or* move all the pixdesc stuff to lavu.
why would lavc need the pixdescs ? if it doesnt they could be moved to sws
also let me repeat, 1 patch per mail please!
if we ever implement the suggested patch tracker all mails with multiple
patches will "disapear".
its easy to search subjs for [PATCH], easy to search for looks ok and
applied but this breaks down if there are multiple patches per mail
besides its alot harder for me to keep track and i suspect also for
others independant of any fancy tools
also its hard to reply to a subset of patches in this mess mails.
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the
dead. -- Aristotle
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel