[FFmpeg-devel] Apache licensed AMR library, patches

[Andres Mejia]

On Friday 15 May 2009 17:46:40 Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 10:05:41PM +0300, Martin Storsj? wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:35:54PM +0300, Martin Storsj? wrote:
> > > > I've made a wrapper around the AMR codecs from Google Android (from a
> > > > package named OpenCore, provided by PacketVideo); this is an "as
> > > > simple as it gets" and proof of concept wrapper providing the same
> > > > interfaces as libamr-nb/wb as used by ffmpeg. (Benjamin Larsson
> > > > mentioned the availability of these codecs in October, in
> > > > http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2008-October/055088.
> > > >html.)
>
> I finally got around to testing the opencore AMR libraries.  They work
> nicely and of course pretty much anything is better than the non-free
> libamr.
>
> > > I'm not sure this is the best approach.  Is there a disadvantage to
> > > using a separate wrapper?
> >
> > The wrapper is very thin and just maps the interface to the AMR
> > implementation in OpenCore. The main effort is to be able to build the
> > relevant parts without getting all the rest of OpenCore and the kitchen
> > sink, and figuring out what's a suitable level of abstraction in the
> > OpenCore AMR routines. It could of course be argued that this just should
> > be a repackaging of the AMR parts of OpenCore, and support for this as
> > yet another external library should be added to ffmpeg.
> >
> > This was, incidentally, one of the tasks on the "Small FFmpeg Tasks" at
> > http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=Small_FFmpeg_Tasks#Create_a_lib
> >amr_compatible_library_of_the_Android_amr_codec, added by Benjamin Larsson
> > I think.
> >
> > I don't really have much opinion in this question, this was mostly a
> > proof of concept. In this approach, the same drop-in replacement could
> > perhaps be used by other projects that currently link to libamr, too.
>
> So where do we go from here?  I'm not sure if it's a good idea to really
> build a drop-in replacement for libamr.  There should be some way to
> distinguish the two libraries and just use the Apache-licensed one.
>
> One way to achieve this would be to rename the libraries, i.e. not use
> libamrnb.* and libamrwb.* as names but libamropencore or whatever
> instead.
>
> Thoughts?

I was thinking the libraries should be renamed to libopencore-amrnb.so.* and 
libopencore-amrwb.so.*. The include paths should also be changed, I was thinking 
/usr/include/opencore-amrnb/* and /usr/include/opencore-amrwb/*.

-- 
Regards,
Andres
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20090516/c31b8d57/attachment.pgp>