On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 10:30 PM Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 4:18 PM Muhammad Faiz <mfc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 5:40 PM Andreas Rheinhardt < > > andreas.rheinha...@outlook.com> wrote: > > > > > Muhammad Faiz: > > > > On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 3:58 PM Andreas Rheinhardt < > > > > andreas.rheinha...@outlook.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Andreas Rheinhardt: > > > >>> Obsolete since 4ca1fb9d2a91757c8c4c34dd456abf340e3f765f. > > > >>> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Rheinhardt <andreas.rheinha...@outlook.com> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> doc/filters.texi | 9 --- > > > >>> libavfilter/Makefile | 1 - > > > >>> libavfilter/allfilters.c | 2 - > > > >>> libavfilter/fifo.c | 165 > > --------------------------------------- > > > >>> 4 files changed, 177 deletions(-) > > > >>> delete mode 100644 libavfilter/fifo.c > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> Will apply in a few days unless there are objections. > > > >> > > > >> - Andreas > > > >> > > > >> > > > > This breaks backward compatibility. > > > > > > > > Please revert. > > > > > > > > Thank's. > > > > > > What breaks that can't simply be fixed by removing the (a)fifo filter > > > from the filterchain? > > > > > > - Andreas > > > > > > > > I use afifo to optimize memory usage. > > > > That statement sync with reality is questionable, fifo filters were mainly > used before .activate was added, > for cases filters used >1 inputs. Now they should be irrelevant, unless > there are bugs in code than this filters just hide more bugs. > Yes, I've used it before .activate was added, and it worked, and still works. Although maybe the bugs have been fixed by .activate, what's wrong if (a)fifo still exist? Thank's _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
