Loïc Minier wrote:
I currently see no way to achieve building of gst-ffmpeg in a sane and
maintainable way, and it seems we are very far from that. Very very
far.
I don't consider the case of gst-ffmpeg to be in any way similar to
mplayer's case; xine-lib would be closer. Consider
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:08:19AM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
My opinion on this matter was requested, so I'm documenting it here.
gst-ffmpeg suffers from a very similar problem, since it has an
embedded fork of ffmpeg.
Just to clarify: MPlayer does not contain an embedded fork of FFmpeg,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006, Diego Biurrun wrote:
Just to clarify: MPlayer does not contain an embedded fork of FFmpeg,
the FFmpeg libraries used in MPlayer are unmodified.
I really fail to see why the same code should be in two sources then.
The Debian Mplayer packages should simply be uploaded
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 03:17:49PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006, Diego Biurrun wrote:
Just to clarify: MPlayer does not contain an embedded fork of FFmpeg,
the FFmpeg libraries used in MPlayer are unmodified.
I really fail to see why the same code should be in two
Hi,
My opinion on this matter was requested, so I'm documenting it here.
gst-ffmpeg suffers from a very similar problem, since it has an
embedded fork of ffmpeg. My understanding is that upstream needs more
than ffmpeg's offer in the first place, and also rewrote the build
5 matches
Mail list logo
