> I think we should consider branching into rockbox and rockbox-classic
I think we can find a better name than "classic" to avoid confusion
with ipod classic.
--
Rafaël Carré
On 15 December 2011 12:50, Boris Gjenero wrote:
> Apparently, there are few HWCODEC users, and I'm not sure if any developers
> regularly use current builds on HWCODEC targets. Because of that, there
> isn't much focus on improving things for HWCODEC.
On this point, I remember there was a HWCODEC
Apparently, there are few HWCODEC users, and I'm not sure if any
developers regularly use current builds on HWCODEC targets. Because of
that, there isn't much focus on improving things for HWCODEC.
Developers have done an impressive job keeping HWCODEC functional while
making large changes. Ho
On 15 December 2011 10:58, Rafaël Carré wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Le Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:21:42 -0500,
> Mike Giacomelli a écrit :
>> Advantages:
>>
>> ***Greatly simplify large parts of the code for SWCODEC targets (see
>> JdGordon's forum posts in rockbox general)
>>
So, my issue isnt so much HWCODEC
Hello,
Le Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:21:42 -0500,
Mike Giacomelli a écrit :
> Hi everyone.
>
> Over the last couple months there has been some discussion about what
> to do with HWCODEC following dreamlayer's forum thread. During this
> discussion, several developers still using HWCODEC mentioned tha
Hi everyone.
Over the last couple months there has been some discussion about what
to do with HWCODEC following dreamlayer's forum thread. During this
discussion, several developers still using HWCODEC mentioned that they
preferred/recommended older builds over newer releases. The general
opinio
Sorry, I've had some trouble reaching the list and need to test.
Mike
