Quoting Luca Barbato (2015-11-08 16:30:39) > On 08/11/15 15:58, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Luca Barbato (2015-11-08 15:45:56) > >> On 08/11/15 15:36, Anton Khirnov wrote: > >>> If it's only for img2dec internal usage then it does not need to be > >>> public. And it should be in the same set as the patch that actually uses > >>> it. Just adding a function without anything using it is bad. > >> > >> avio_check() exists and it is unreliable. It is used in a couple of > >> places in our codebase, in avconv it is just restricted to files, in > >> img2dec unrestricted. > >> > >> The two options are: > >> > >> - deem the use-case for the function fringe and drop it. > >> - make so it working fine with protocols with options (one way is the > >> one I posted here). > > > > I still don't see what problem are you solving. No protocol other than > > file implements url_check() currently. What other protocols specifically > > do you have in mind? > > If url_check is not implemented the fallback is basically to open the > connection, if you are using protocols that have options (e.g. http) > those option can change completely how the server would behave. > > For example right now if you try to fetch an image from an nginx server > might not work at all because nginx reacts (weirdly) to the Icy message > we send by default. > > And since we do not forward the protocol options to it, it would > continue to send the wrong headers. > > Same thing for accessing something restricted by headers.
Ok, now that sounds like a real use case. But that's really only applies to img2dec (which is itself a hack that should go away eventually, but I digress), not to avconv. So, unless there are other arguments, I would keep this private. -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
