>If they start rejecting correct and useful patches just
>because the submitter uses a compiler or distribution they
>don't like, I'd be in favor of a fork (assuming we could
>find a reasonably good maintainer with enough time at
>hands), but AFAIK this hasn't happened.
I know they are rejecti
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> Yes. I knew about the original FUD, I'm interested in everything else,
> the cause and the fix in particular. (Because those will help other people
> who wrote similar code).
Sure. Mplayer used to include assembler code like this:
/* Limit R
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
> What's license on mplayer?
GPL
> Is it possible to fork the project?
It would be possible - but I doubt their attitude is enough of a reason to
do lots of duplicate work, as long as they're doing a good job otherwise.
If they start rejecting correct a
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Alex Kanavin wrote:
> Or do you want me to comment on the "mmx code skipping bug" - the
> symptoms, the cause, the fix, and who's guilty?
Yes. I knew about the original FUD, I'm interested in everything else,
the cause and the fix in particular. (Because those will help ot
czwartek, 25 październik 2001, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer napisał(a):
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
>
> > Here it is:
> > http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/faq.html#5.1
>
> I knew that one - I didn't know what really caused their problems.
Yes, I thought so, especially after reading
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Alex Kanavin wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
> > > Or just use avifile. I'm not familiar with it though, but I hope the
> > > developers are not as arrogant.
> > Thanks for the suggestion. I will not touch mplayer with a pole.
> Well, having said a
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> > still they managed to completely misrepresent it, the FAQ entry about 2.96
> > is a plain lie - in their favour of course.
> Do you have the details on this one? I'd like to add a note on it on the
> gcc 2.96 FUD-counter page.
Sure, check h
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
> Here it is:
> http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/faq.html#5.1
I knew that one - I didn't know what really caused their problems.
LLaP
bero
___
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://li
czwartek, 25 październik 2001, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer napisał(a):
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Alex Kanavin wrote:
>
> > By the way, it was me who fixed that mmx bug in mplayer, the only known
> > ACTUAL problem with 2.96 (oh, and gcc 3.0 also has it, but that does not
> > fit their "2.96 is buggy" the
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Jean Francois Martinez wrote:
> > Or just use avifile. I'm not familiar with it though, but I hope the
> > developers are not as arrogant.
> Thanks for the suggestion. I will not touch mplayer with a pole.
Well, having said all that, I also have to say that _technically_ mp
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Alex Kanavin wrote:
> By the way, it was me who fixed that mmx bug in mplayer, the only known
> ACTUAL problem with 2.96 (oh, and gcc 3.0 also has it, but that does not
> fit their "2.96 is buggy" theory so they silently ignore this fact) -
> still they managed to completely
Alex Kanavin a écrit :
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
>
> > > The main developer is using Slackware. This pretty much explains his
> > > attitide towards gcc 2.96-RH ("It's buggy shit! No, I don't know what the
> > > bugs are and I don't care.") and Red Hat users in general
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
> > The main developer is using Slackware. This pretty much explains his
> > attitide towards gcc 2.96-RH ("It's buggy shit! No, I don't know what the
> > bugs are and I don't care.") and Red Hat users in general. But he still
> > could be called r
czwartek, 25 październik 2001, Alex Kanavin napisał(a):
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
>
> > Confirmed, I've had no problems with any mplayer version starting
> > from 0.18pre3 to current CVS version, compiled with optimizations
> > either for Athlon/Duron or for K6-2.
> > I g
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Dominik Mierzejewski wrote:
> Confirmed, I've had no problems with any mplayer version starting
> from 0.18pre3 to current CVS version, compiled with optimizations
> either for Athlon/Duron or for K6-2.
> I guess it's just the autors' brain-damage. I mean, it wasn't enough
>
Gary Sandine a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 09:32:55PM -0400, Matt Wilson wrote:
> > I'm unaware of any MMX related bug in the gcc 2.96 errata packages
> > released for the Red Hat Linux 7.x series.
>
> My understanding is that GCC 2.x (96 <= x <= 98) ignores MMX routines; one
> should use g
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 09:32:55PM -0400, Matt Wilson wrote:
> I'm unaware of any MMX related bug in the gcc 2.96 errata packages
> released for the Red Hat Linux 7.x series.
My understanding is that GCC 2.x (96 <= x <= 98) ignores MMX routines; one
should use gcc 2.95 or gcc 3.0 in this case (i.
On Thursday, 11 October 2001, Matt Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 09:16:03AM +0200, Martin Ma?ok wrote:
> > =
> >
> > http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/
> > ...
> > Appendix D - Known bugs
> > ...
> > * No image (black image) in RGB 15/16bpp (x11,dga,fbdev,svga) playing MPEG or
> > Open
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 09:16:03AM +0200, Martin Maèok wrote:
> =
>
> http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/
> ...
> Appendix D - Known bugs
> ...
> * No image (black image) in RGB 15/16bpp (x11,dga,fbdev,svga) playing MPEG or
> OpenDivX files:
> Problem: gcc 2.96 bug
> Workaround: .
I wish to UNSUBSCRIBE from this group .. please let me know the mail ID.
__
Rajesh Joshi
-Original Message-
From: Martin Macok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 12:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: gcc-2.96 mmx bug? (mplayer)
On Sun, Jul
On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 12:43:30AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47817
>
> I was compiling new MPlayer-0.18pre and it complains about gcc
> version. (http://freshmeat.net/projects/mplayer/)
> So I read the DOCS and found this in their FAQ:
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
