On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:11:31AM -0700, Aℓex Converse wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2011/4/21 Aℓex Converse <aconve...@google.com>: > >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> wrote: > >>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:56:07AM -0700, Aℓex Converse wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> wrote: > >>>> > Do not call av_log_ask_for_sample() from av_log_missing_feature() > >>>> > depending on > >>>> > the value of a flag parameter. Instead, call av_log_ask_for_sample() > >>>> > directly > >>>> > where this is desired. This simplifies av_log_missing_feature() and > >>>> > makes for > >>>> > a nicer API. > >>>> > > >>>> > --- a/libavcodec/avcodec.h > >>>> > +++ b/libavcodec/avcodec.h > >>>> > @@ -4097,12 +4097,8 @@ > >>>> > -void av_log_missing_feature(void *avc, const char *feature, int > >>>> > want_sample); > >>>> > +void av_log_missing_feature(void *avc, const char *feature); > >>>> > >>>> [...] > >>>> > >>>> This is a public header. > >>> > >>> You mean that this would require a major/minor bump? We're in the period > >>> fter the bump that is officially declared unstable API time, plus those > >>> functions are not supposed to be used outside of libav* as the Doxygen > >>> explains: > >>> > >>> /** > >>> * Logs a generic warning message about a missing feature. This function > >>> is > >>> * intended to be used internally by Libav (libavcodec, libavformat, etc.) > >>> * only, and would normally not be used by applications. > >>> > >>> I didn't make this up, don't shoot the messenger :) > >> > >> Since libavformat and libavcodec were bumped at the same time and the > >> API is declared unstable I suppose this is ok. For extra karma > >> consider moving it to a not-installed header.
Is libavformat allowed to use not-installed libavcodec headers? > > It needs to remain av_*() prefixed since it's shared between avf/avc, > > though. > > We keep flip-flopping on this. There are plenty of ff_ symbols shard > between the two. What about moving this to libavutil if it is shared between lavc and lavf anyway? It might also become used in other libs in the future. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
