Hi, On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:25:08PM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Diego Biurrun <di...@biurrun.de> wrote: >> > This allows using "mmxext" as name in Libav while staying compatible >> > with changes to the YASM macro infrastructure imported from x264. >> > --- >> > libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm | 1 + >> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> > >> > --- a/libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm >> > +++ b/libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm >> > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ >> > ; to x264-de...@videolan.org . >> > >> > %define program_name ff >> > +%define cpuflags_mmxext cpuflags_mmx2 >> >> Any such a change to x86inc.asm is OK if and only if x264 accepts this >> change upstream. Loren? > > The x86inc.asm files from x264 and Libav are already different, x264 uses > "x264" instead of "ff" as program_name. That's the reason why I chose to > place the alias in this very spot: during upstream merges there will be > no conflicts that are not > > a) trivial to fix and > b) would have occurred anyway due to the existing difference. > > This patch is also what a room full of Libav developers accepted as a > compromise at VDD. Please don't oppose the consensus of your peers.
You keep trying to push this through. No. I do the syncing, and nobody wants to take that job from me, I assure you. Every time the semantics of cglobal change by however little, someone who knows that stuff needs to go in and fix/port it. I prefer to not have to take any additional tasks on me, such as maintaining forky differences. Thus, please, no. Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
