[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/4] configure: add fftw3 detection

Ganesh Ajjanagadde gajjanag at gmail.com
Fri Mar 25 15:50:22 CET 2016

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Reimar Döffinger
<Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:05:09AM +0100, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> On 3/25/16, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >                                 { require libfdk_aac fdk-aac/aacenc_lib.h
>> > aacEncOpen -lfdk-aac &&
>> >                                   warn "using libfdk without pkg-config"; }
>> > }
>> > +enabled libfftw3          && require2 libfftw3f "fftw3.h" fftwf_execute
>> > -lfftw3f -lm
>> >  flite_libs="-lflite_cmu_time_awb -lflite_cmu_us_awb -lflite_cmu_us_kal
>> > -lflite_cmu_us_kal16 -lflite_cmu_us_rms -lflite_cmu_us_slt -lflite_usenglish
>> > -lflite_cmulex -lflite"
>> >  enabled libflite          && require2 libflite "flite/flite.h" flite_init
>> > $flite_libs
>> >  enabled fontconfig        && enable libfontconfig
>> > --
>> > 2.7.4
>> Big NO from me. Please refrain from doing such silly things.
>> Either improve our implementation or do nothing.
> I don't disagree with the basic objections, but
> I'd appreciate more diplomacy and kindness (and
> space for people to explain there motivations)
> in the responses.

To see if I understand the objections a bit better, how is this for a
one line summary:
FFmpeg does not like external libs, no matter how good or bad they are
relative to its own code, when it has internal code that does roughly
the same thing.

> I am in the habit of liking to call things silly
> myself, but honestly almost all patches here
> exist for a good reason, even if including
> them is not a good idea, and I don't want to
> discourage people from sending in interesting
> but "silly" things just because they might be derided.

BTW, in case you want to know for e.g improving communication, this is
not the first time. This has happened on multiple occassions before. I
actually very much appreciate Paul's and Clement's responses here.
Unlike others here, they actually point out their fundamental
objections at the beginning instead of showing some "fake interest",
wait until a thread completely develops before saying "no way":

Or also have a look at

> Sorry for the long off-topic.

Maybe off-topic, but it is good to get the record straight on this.

> Thanks,
> Reimar
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list