[FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

[wm4]

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 23:33:48 -0400
Reinhard Tartler <siretart at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:22:43PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 10:06:10PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> as discussed in IRC, I was trying to minimal-invasively port
> >> >> libpostproc (the Debian source package) to x32¹. I could not
> >> >> test it (for lack of a stand-alone test program) yet, but at
> >> >> least I got it to build.
> >> >
> >> > you could try to test by buiding ffmpeg as a whole but disable asm
> >> > everywhere except libpostproc
> >> > that might allow "easy" testing though fate or ffmpeg with libavfilter
> >>
> >> Is http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git still maintained?
> >
> > AFAIK, no, it seems the last commit is 2 years ago
> >
> >
> >>
> >> The Debian package tracks that repository, and ideally we could
> >> collect the postproc patches there.
> >
> > libpostproc was and is maintained in
> > git://source.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.git
> 
> So the promise given in
> https://lists.libav.org/pipermail/libav-devel/2012-February/020712.html
> doesn't hold anymore?
> 
> Any chance to make you reconsider reviving the standalone libpostproc.git?

Yes, let me add my protest against this bullshit of still maintaining
libpostproc as part of ffmpeg.git in FFmpeg.

> > please use that for the debian package
> 
> I fear that's not feasible at this point.
>