On 27/09/2017 16:28, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > 2017-09-27 17:21 GMT+02:00 Josh de Kock <j...@itanimul.li>: >> On 27/09/2017 16:17, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >>> 2017-09-27 17:15 GMT+02:00 wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com>: >>>> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:08:06 +0200 >>>> Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 2017-09-27 15:18 GMT+02:00 Josh de Kock <j...@itanimul.li>: >>>>> >>>>>> There is no point of having these output devices as all the >>>>>> functionality is contained in the 'ffplay' tool. >>>>> >>>>> I use at least sdl and opengl regularly for tests that cannot >>>>> be done with ffplay. >>>> >>>> How does it make sense to use those for testing >>> >>> FFplay only supports a limited set of pix_fmts, >>> contrary to those devices. >> >> So if there is pix_fmt parity then I can remove OpenGL, and SDL2? > > No, but you can mark my argument as obsolete.
I see no reason to bring parity to ffplay then. >> This should be simple enough. > > Sure? > I was more under the assumption that this is simply impossible. > (Until SDL3) Why would it be impossible? I don't see how the OpenGL, SDL2 device could support more pixel formats than FFplay when they *all* use SDL2. -- Josh _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel