[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 5/5] doc: remove avutil.txt
stefasab at gmail.com
Sun Nov 10 21:28:30 CET 2013
On date Sunday 2013-11-10 16:56:04 -0300, James Almer encoded:
> On 10/11/13 8:48 AM, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > I don't know if we should move this (and the "It is not a library for
> > code needed by both libavcodec and libavformat" thing) to
> > libavutil.texi.
> Regarding the "It is not a library for code needed by both libavcodec and
> libavformat", how true is that in general? What's people opinion?
> I have so far contributed with RIPEMD and SHA-2 512 modules that, while
> certainly useful in many situations, they seemingly aren't so in multimedia.
> No format or protocol ever seems to use anything but CRC32, MD5 or SHA-1.
> I ask because i have written several other crypto modules (MD4, CRC64, Tiger
> and Whirlpool, all available in my github repo) that i haven't yet submitted
> for reviewing because i wasn't sure they were worth the maintenance burden
> if no format or protocol would ever give them any use.
> If lavu's purpose is being a feature complete utility library (or as complete
> as possible at least) meant to be used in any kind of project, then I'll post
> them here.
Different developers have different opinions, as to what we should
consider lavu for. In the end is the module maintainer who decides in
OTOH it would be useful to know what's your specific use case, and why
you can't use for example a more generic library for achieving the
About the "smallness" thing, we agreed that allowing conditional
compilation of the required submodules would be useful for various
reasons (e.g. to decrease binary size), but this was never
FFmpeg = Formidable & Fantastic Most Portable Explosive Gorilla
More information about the ffmpeg-devel