[FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg status on WinCE

[İsmail Dönmez]

2009/8/3 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
> ?smail D?nmez <ismail at namtrac.org> writes:
>
>> 2009/8/3 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
>>> ?smail D?nmez <ismail at namtrac.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> 2009/8/2 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
>>>>> ?smail D?nmez <ismail at namtrac.org> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009/8/2 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
>>>>>>> I didn't say POSIX, understanding how hard that can be, I said C.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still with one active developer thats just not possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> I take that as a sign that nobody really cares then.
>>>>
>>>> WinCE itself is ugly piece of shit, I am glad someone created cegcc to
>>>> help for us mere mortals messing with WinCE. In the end this is all
>>>> free software development...
>>>
>>> I am well aware of the free software development model. ?Nevertheless,
>>> there are limits to the levels of crap I am willing to support. ?If
>>> people are genuinely interested in building apps for wince, they
>>> should help out with cegcc/mingw32ce, not stuff other projects full of
>>> hacks. ?If they don't care enough to do this, I really think we're
>>> wasting our time supporting this joke of a system.
>>
>> The only way to avoid hacks would be fixing arm-cegcc (WinCE POSIX
>> emulation port) and that would require deep knowledge of gcc, arm &
>> wince. I don't think there are much people with such capabilities. So
>> its not about not caring.
>
> How would adding those function stubs there be any harder than adding
> them to FFmpeg?

arm-cegcc is incomplete, adding the stubs won't make FFmpeg compile at
all since its non-functional in other parts. arm-mingw32ce is on the
other hand is complete and these stubs does not belong there since the
original WinCE SDK does not provide them. See the problem  now?

Regards.

-- 
?smail D?NMEZ