[FFmpeg-devel] [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [PATCH] avformat/mxfdec: dont truncate packets
michaelni at gmx.at
Wed Feb 5 22:25:29 CET 2014
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 04:09:17PM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-02-04 at 16:54 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 04:23:13PM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > > Aside: can we just use libmxf instead? Or would that cause problems? I
> > > know NIH runs deep in this project, but for stuff like MXF it makes
> > > sense to have fewer confused implementations around (especially true for
> > > muxers)
> > adding libmxf wrapers, sure perfectly welcome
> > prefering libmxf if available, would probably be the decission of the
> > mxf muxer/demuxer maintainer if there is no consensus. That first
> > would need libmxf wrapers though
> > droping our mxf (de)muxer, in favor of libmxf, well that has a
> > problem. no libmxf package in ubuntu LTS (and i guess others) and that
> > would make this rather inconvenient for the end user.
> Sounds like "no worries" to me - just add ingex as a submodule/subtree*
> and link lavf to libMXF statically unless told to use the system's
> libMXF.so. That way future distributions can create ingex packages with
> dynamic libraries and tell lavf to link to them instead.
> *) libMXF is part of the ingex project which uses CVS, but perhaps the
> Beeb can be convinced to switch to git (or FFmpeg keeps an endorsed git
> mirror of it)
> > Also with external libs you generally cannot do regression tests as
> > their output changes depending on their and not our revission.
> Not a problem if we point to specific commits via submodule/subtree.
I wouldnt call that external
rather thats just one of several ways to include the code internally
which yes would work
> Plus isn't this the kind of stuff that package managers are supposed to
> handle? "FFmpeg version X requires ingex version [Y,Z)"
do you volunteer to maintain this ?
I mean debug and fix all the regression test failures like
when someone on netbsd who has ffmpeg 1.2 and libmxf 7.8 installed on
a alpha having a different checksum from what you have on linux
with maybe not exactly the same versions ?
and would any distribution package it with such tight dependancies?
they might have other packages and if they have different but
similarly tight dependancies that would prevent them fro being
installed at the same time with some luck
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: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel