t; > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> > decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
> >
> > > I intent to push the awk version. I will wait at least until
> > > Thursday, so people can further test, comment, or object.
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf Of
> avih
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2019 6:29 AM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> decoder/enc
> I intent to push the awk version. I will wait at least until
> Thursday, so people can further test, comment, or object.
No further comments here.
Thanks!
Avi
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
Hi all,
hi Avi!
Sorry for the late reply.
On 2019-05-07 12:22 +, avih wrote:
> > patch1 (awk) configure: print_in_columns: replace pr with awk version:
> > http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2019-May/243380.html
> > patch2 (shell) configure: sort decoder/encoder/filter/... names in
> patch1 (awk) configure: print_in_columns: replace pr with awk version:
> http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2019-May/243380.html
> patch2 (shell) configure: sort decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet
> order (v5 as posted in this thread)
>
> - Why do you prefer patch1 over patch2?
gt;> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
>> decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
>>
>> On 2019-05-05 21:14 +, avih wrote:
>> > > I guess you were looking at the right patch. I mean this one:
[...]
>> > > >
>> &
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf Of
> Alexander Strasser
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2019 6:21 AM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
On 2019-05-05 21:14 +, avih wrote:
> > I guess you were looking at the right patch. I mean this one:
> > http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2019-May/243380.html
>
> I was referring to this patch indeed. Thanks.
>
>
> > > > Agreed; of course we shouldn't just use awk because we can.
> >
> I guess you were looking at the right patch. I mean this one:
> http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2019-May/243380.html
I was referring to this patch indeed. Thanks.
> > > Agreed; of course we shouldn't just use awk because we can.
> > >
> > > Though I think not implementing things in
Hi!
On 2019-05-04 06:28 +, avih wrote:
> > On 2019-05-02 08:55 +, avih wrote:
> > > > It seems awk is unconditionally required already. However I wanted to
> > > > say that it's a very nice dep to have
> > >
> > > While it's possibly nicer than other deps to have, it's still better to
>
> On 2019-05-02 08:55 +, avih wrote:
> > > It seems awk is unconditionally required already. However I wanted to
> > > say that it's a very nice dep to have
> >
> > While it's possibly nicer than other deps to have, it's still better to use
> > it IMHO only when it adds some value, like
Hi Carl Eugen!
On 2019-05-01 22:57 +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2019-04-28 3:18 GMT+02:00, Alexander Strasser :
>
> > What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
>
> Do we only use awk for --enable-random and the dependency
> files so far? Does configure also work without awk now and
Hi Avih!
On 2019-05-02 08:55 +, avih wrote:
> > It seems awk is unconditionally required already. However I wanted to
> > say that it's a very nice dep to have
>
> While it's possibly nicer than other deps to have, it's still better to use
> it IMHO only when it adds some value, like simpler
> It seems awk is unconditionally required already. However I wanted to
> say that it's a very nice dep to have
While it's possibly nicer than other deps to have, it's still better to use
it IMHO only when it adds some value, like simpler code, better performance,
compliance with some things,
On Wed, 1 May 2019 22:57:47 +0200
Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2019-04-28 3:18 GMT+02:00, Alexander Strasser :
>
> > What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
>
> Do we only use awk for --enable-random and the dependency
> files so far? Does configure also work without awk now and
> would
2019-04-28 3:18 GMT+02:00, Alexander Strasser :
> What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
Do we only use awk for --enable-random and the dependency
files so far? Does configure also work without awk now and
would this change?
Thank you, Carl Eugen
On 2019-04-29 00:55 +, Guo, Yejun wrote:
[...]
> > Wild guess: CR LF line endings are emitted somewhere and the CRs stay in
> > the input. Your terminal resets the cursor to the start of the line when
> > interpreting the midline CRs.
> >
> > Does it work if you extend the tr in
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 9:18 AM
> > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
>
> > > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> > > decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
> > >
> > >
> > > What d
ches
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> > decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
> >
> >
> > What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
> >
> > I have 2 POC patches attached. It's probably not 1
On 2019-04-28 03:11 +, avih wrote:
> > What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
>
> No objection here, especially if it's more robust in some ways than this
> or other shell code (though personally I'm not fluent in awk).
>
> My only concern was preventing a considerable performance
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel [mailto:ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org] On Behalf Of
> Alexander Strasser
> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 9:18 AM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> What do you think about using awk instead of shell?
No objection here, especially if it's more robust in some ways than this
or other shell code (though personally I'm not fluent in awk).
My only concern was preventing a considerable performance impact which could
otherwise be avoided
om]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 9:22 PM
> > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
> > Cc: Guo, Yejun
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> > decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
> >
> > > print_in_colum
>
> From: avih [mailto:avih...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 9:22 PM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
> Cc: Guo, Yejun
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH V5 1/2] configure: sort
> decoder/encoder/filter/... names in alphabet order
>
> print_in_columns() {
> - cols=$(expr $ncols / 24)
> - cat | tr ' ' '\n' | sort | pr -r "-$cols" -w $ncols -t
> + # the input should not contain chars such as '*',
> + # otherwise, '*' will be expanded to be all files in the current
> + # working directory which don't begin with a
take decoder names an example, with the default page length, shell command
'pr' needs two pages for all the decoder names. The names are firstly printed
in the first page, then in the second page. So, as a whole, the names are
sorted neither in column order nor in row order. It's a little
26 matches
Mail list logo
