Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would like
to change from XFS to another filesystem for multimedia.
System-partitions use ext3 here.
What do you recommend?
Al
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of
Le Mardi 10 Juin 2003 07:44, vous avez écrit :
> Hi
>
> I have a clip here but I want to select only a part of it to blow it up to
> full size PAL. Resolution is a second issue.
>
> The option -I USE_WidthxHeight+WidthOffset+HeightOffset should do the
> trick followed by SIZE_WidthxHeight and the
> From: Al Bogner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would like
Is this with SuSE 8.x? If so then 'xfs' is included with the
vanilla-kernel - XFS is what I use for all the data/capture filesystems.
> What do you recommend?
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:52:42 +0200
Al Bogner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would like
>
> to change from XFS to another filesystem for multimedia.
> System-partitions use ext3 here.
>
> What do you recommend?
I use reiserfs for non-root
Hey Al,
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 16:52, Al Bogner wrote:
> Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would like
> to change from XFS to another filesystem for multimedia.
> System-partitions use ext3 here.
>
> What do you recommend?
Anything will work. ext3, reiser, even ext2.
Ro
Does anyone know of a UNIX method to transform an ASF file to a format
that I can use MJPEGtools to encode to a VCD MPEG? I'm not concerned
about quality loss - it's just a video I'd rather sit and watch on TV
rather than my computer.
Thanks,
Jon
--
> Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would like
> to change from XFS to another filesystem for multimedia.
> System-partitions use ext3 here.
Curious why a vanilla kernel would matter. Frankly Linus is the person I
trust the least to come up with a stable kernel. XFS is th
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of a UNIX method to transform an ASF file to a format
> that I can use MJPEGtools to encode to a VCD MPEG? I'm not concerned
> about quality loss - it's just a video I'd rather sit and watch on TV
> rather than my computer.
Assumi
> Curious why a vanilla kernel would matter. Frankly Linus is the person I
> trust the least to come up with a stable kernel. XFS is the best
> filesystem for multimedia use, since you can get almost raw disk/io
> performance on large sequential reads. If you don't want XFS I'd probably
> just g
On Wednesday 04 June 2003 17.57, you wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 07:41, Michael Hanke wrote:
> > > If you did want to use the "Playback Video" page. I fear it cannot
> > > work. Because that is a feature only for the zoran based cards.
> >
> > Oops, this is exactly what I did because I
On Tuesday 10 June 2003 17:28, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> > Since XFS isn't supported with a current vanilla-kernel I would
> > like
>
> Is this with SuSE 8.x?
Yes it is for SuSE 8.2. But I need the changes for AMD / nforce. See
other post, why I have problems to use XFS.
Al
---
Hallo
> > Seems that you need to change the framerate. This can currently only be
> > done with yuvfps from the mjpegtools CVS.
>
> I search the yuvfps a lot, and nothing!
> I search on mjpegtools CVS, on the site, and only the google I saw a posted
> message from developers!
When you search the
On Tuesday 10 June 2003 18:29, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Curious why a vanilla kernel would matter. Frankly Linus is
> > the person I trust the least to come up with a stable kernel.
> > XFS is the best filesystem for multimedia use, since you can
> > get almost raw disk/io performance on large sequen
Hey,
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 18:03, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> Curious why a vanilla kernel would matter. Frankly Linus is the person I
> trust the least to come up with a stable kernel.
Fortunately then, Linus is not in charge of the stable kernel series.
Marcello is.
(just teasing ;) )
Ronald
Title: RE: [Mjpeg-users] Which filesystem with vanilla-kernel?
I prefer ReiserFS, for few reasons:
1. No messing with kernel patches, I use kernel 2.4.20
2. Uses disk space efficiently.
3. Deletes big files allot faster than any other file system.
4. Recent release is reliable, although ther
OFFTOPIC:
Honestly I wish that as soon as the Kernels hit .0-preX that Linus would
simply hand off the testing to someone who is better at stability and work
on the next development revision.
But then again, I don't contribute nearly as much as he does :]
Jon
> Hey,
>
> On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 18
Hey Jon,
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 22:16, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> Honestly I wish that as soon as the Kernels hit .0-preX that Linus would
> simply hand off the testing to someone who is better at stability and work
> on the next development revision.
Care to explain why? I've seen little reason t
Linus likes to add stuff even after his official "Feature freeze" date. I
know why - he likes development - he likes architecting - he likes making
things architecturally perfect. However, the process of making something
architecturally perfect is not the same process as making something
stable.
On Maw, 2003-06-10 at 22:36, Ronald Bultje wrote:
> Hey Jon,
>
> On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 22:16, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> > Honestly I wish that as soon as the Kernels hit .0-preX that Linus would
> > simply hand off the testing to someone who is better at stability and work
> > on the next develop
Hi -
Anyone used ppmtoy4m to create composited from PPM images
(for example from a scanner/camera) for a DVD?
It's working - but what I'm ending up with is 720x480 progressive
and that's not, as far as I know, legal for use in making a DVD.
What I'm doing
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> Hi -
>
> Anyone used ppmtoy4m to create composited from PPM images
> (for example from a scanner/camera) for a DVD?
>
> It's working - but what I'm ending up with is 720x480 progressive
> and that's not, as far as I know, l
>
> Anyone used ppmtoy4m to create composited from PPM images
> (for example from a scanner/camera) for a DVD?
>
> It's working - but what I'm ending up with is 720x480 progressive
> and that's not, as far as I know, legal for use in making a DVD.
>
> What I'm doin
Hi -
> From: Selva Nair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As the source is progressive ppm frames, better keep it that way.
> Use -F 24000:1001 and encode with pull down flag:
Well, as it turns out it seems that the encoder is "doing the right
thing" for me (despite my being confused ;)).
Hi -
> From: Selva Nair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Forgot to mention that if this is meant to be 4:3 aspect, you should
> scale to 704x480 and then pad to 720x480. You can avoid vertical scaling
> using 640x480 ---(scale)--> 704x480 ---pad--> 720x480.
Hmmm, I was told (at one time) to avo
24 matches
Mail list logo
