On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:20 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:09 AM, rukhsana afroz
> wrote:
>
> Just have pushed one clean repository.
>
>
In this branch, I have splitted one single commit into a number of commits.
:)
--
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd Student
Department of Electri
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:09 AM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
Just have pushed one clean repository.
--
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd Student
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
The University of British Columbia
___
libav-devel m
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:36 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
> Here, I have attached my latest patch to have a final look for you.
>
> And Diego, I have fixed my git tree. I just have pushed one clean branch to
> the github.
>
> Thnaks
>
>
>
pushed another clean git tree.
>
> --
>
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd S
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 2:55 AM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
> I tested my decoder and jasper's one with a file which can be decoded
> successfully by both. It seems, defining code blocks and its parameters with
> how it should be decoded is completely implemnetation dependent. Like the
> previous file
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:46 AM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
>
>>>
>> Hi Ronald,
>>
>> I have attched two files for code block decode results (one is for jasper
>> and one is for libav). I have only shown the entire code block at the
>> beginning and at the end of clnpass function. With the comparison
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>
>
>
> You can use pastebin.com, but I suggest you use IRC instead of this
> mailing list first, I think it's the more suitable medium for the
> kind of help you are looking for.
>
>
Thanks Diego for your suggestion. I asked on IRC for help.
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:46:46AM -0700, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
> I sent two attachments with two files, however it got bounced because the
> attachments were too big. I am not sure, at this stage, how to send the data
> to you. Please let me know.
You can use pastebin.com, but I suggest you us
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:38 AM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>
>> Hi Rukhsana,
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 2:59 PM, rukhsana afroz
>> Which bit planes are decoded correctly? And especially, how many out
>> of how many? Are 99 out of 100 d
Hi Rukhsana,
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 2:59 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
> Here, I have attached a patch, code block style of which I have tested. Page
> number in the spec is 115 (D.5) for this code block style. This codeblock
> style checks whether the bitplane is decoded correctly in every cleanup
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 4:38 AM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
> Hi Ronald,
>
> I will get back to you soon over the chat soon. Please give me some more
> hours.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
Hi Ronald,
Here, I have attached a patch, code block style of which I have tested. Page
number in the spec is 115
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:28 PM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>
>>
>> You need to re-run configure.
>>
>> Hi Ronald,
>
> Thank you for your information. Yes, I did it and now working on the bug.
>
>
>
>
Hi Ronald,
I will get back to you soon
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>
> You need to re-run configure.
>
> Hi Ronald,
Thank you for your information. Yes, I did it and now working on the bug.
Thanks
--
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd Student
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
The University of British Colu
Hi Rukhsana,
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:05 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
> With current libav, while compiling the code I get the following error:
>
> CC libavdevice/alldevices.o
> In file included from ./libavutil/internal.h:171,
> from ./libavutil/common.h:328,
>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 3:37 AM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:38:38PM -0700, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>>
>>
>> Please break such long lines.
>>
>>
> Thanks Diego for your reviews. I have attached new patch.
Dear Al
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:38:38PM -0700, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> Please break such long lines.
>
>
Thanks Diego for your reviews. I have attached new patch.
--
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd Student
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:38:38PM -0700, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
> I have attached new patch again.
>
> --- a/libavcodec/j2k.c
> +++ b/libavcodec/j2k.c
> @@ -105,18 +105,20 @@ static void tag_tree_zero(J2kTgtNode *t, int w, int h)
>
> -static int getnbctxno(int flag, int bandno)
> +static int
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:30 PM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
> Thanks Nicolas for your comments. I will incorporate those in my code.
>
I have attached new patch again.
--
Rukhsana Ruby
Phd Student
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
The University of British Columbia
=
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Nicolas George <
nicolas.geo...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> Le primidi 1er floréal, an CCXIX, rukhsana afroz a écrit :
> > Here, I have attached the patch.
>
> This time it's not mangled. Getting it to have the correct MIME type would
> have been a plus. You probably
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Nicolas George <
nicolas.geo...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> The patch format is good, but unfortunaetly, the patch is still mangled.
> For
> example, the above quoted text should obviously be a single line, but your
> mailer split it at 72 characters, as if it was te
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:03 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:09 PM, rukhsana afroz
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Nicolas George <
>> nicolas.geo...@normalesup.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I suggest you produce your patch using the revision control tool (svn
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:09 PM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Nicolas George <
> nicolas.geo...@normalesup.org> wrote:
>
>> I suggest you produce your patch using the revision control tool (svn or
>> git), and attach it as a file to avoid its mangling.
>>
>> Hi Rona
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Nicolas George <
nicolas.geo...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> I suggest you produce your patch using the revision control tool (svn or
> git), and attach it as a file to avoid its mangling.
>
> Hi Ronald and Nicolas,
Thanks for your suggestion. Now I have used git diff
Hi Rukhsana,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:55 PM, rukhsana afroz
wrote:
> The following is the patch for selective arithmetic coding bypass cblk_csty:
>
> 595c595
> < static void decode_sigpass(J2kT1Context *t1, int width, int height, int
> bpno, int bandno)
> ---
>> static void decode_sigpass(J2kT1C
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> i dont see a specific question in your mail, my suggestion is just to
> implement the missing feature.
> If you have specific questions ill try my best to help
>
Hi Michael,
The following is the patch for selective arithmetic coding
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 5:13 PM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I am in little bit problem of understanding the spec for implementing clean
> pass operation on a particular code block with different cblk_style. Page
> number of these implementations in spec is 112-119. Could you pleas
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> i dont see a specific question in your mail, my suggestion is just to
> implement the missing feature.
> If you have specific questions ill try my best to help
>
> and sorry for my slow reply
>
>
Hi Michael,
I am in little bit proble
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 6:35 PM, rukhsana afroz wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
>> I suspect the If statement is there as the implementation only supports
>> cblk_style==0
>> the others simply are not implemented
>>
>> Do you think you can implement them?
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> I suspect the If statement is there as the implementation only supports
> cblk_style==0
> the others simply are not implemented
>
> Do you think you can implement them?
>
>
>
Hi all,
I have submitted my proposal on GSoC this year. And
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> I suspect the If statement is there as the implementation only supports
> cblk_style==0
> the others simply are not implemented
>
> Do you think you can implement them?
>
> Hi all,
I have submitted my proposal on GSoC this year. And Mic
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> This results in
> J2K_SIZ = 0xff51
> J2K_COD = 0xff52
> J2K_COC = 0xff53
>
Thanks Michael, I understood that, it was my mistake. While processing
0xff52 (J2K_SOD) marker, the current decoder fails in the following code
segment.
/**
30 matches
Mail list logo
