[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] remove lrintf fallback implementation

[Víctor Paesa]

Hi,

Diego Biurrun said:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:10:08PM +0100, V?ctor Paesa wrote:
>> V?ctor Paesa said:
>>
>> > The route I'm pondering by now is to create my own (minimalistic)
>> libm99: if gcc delivers a C99 function missing in newlib I can do
>> the same too, and it be would just a matter of using --extra-libs
>> instead of patching ffmpeg.
>>
>> It ended up that I do not need to create a separate library, as Cygwin
>> and MinGW use the same COFF format: I can leverage its llrint()
>> implementation.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Hence, instead of patching FFmpeg, my attached patch proposal modifies
>> the documentation for compilation under Cygwin.
>
> Well, patching newlib would be better, but this is OK as well ..
>
>> --- doc/general.texi	(revision 10872)
>> +++ doc/general.texi	(working copy)
>> @@ -530,27 +530,41 @@
>>
>>  @subsection Compilation under Cygwin
>>
>> -Cygwin works very much like Unix.
>> + at url{http://www.cygwin.com/, Cygwin} works very much like Unix, +the
>> main issue being that its C library is
>> + at url{http://sources.redhat.com/newlib/, newlib},
>> +instead of the more usual
>> + at url{http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/, GNU C library}.
>> +
>> +Newlib lacks llrint(), but we can leverage the llrint()
>> implementation +in @url{http://www.mingw.org/, MinGW}.
>
> There are systems other than Linux and they don't all run glibc.  Also,
> we don't need to explain what Cygwin is.  I propose:
>
>   The main issue with Cygwin is that newlib, its C library does not
> contain llrint().  However, it is possible to leverage the
>   implementation in MinGW.
>
> Other than that, commit anytime.

Great, commited as you proposed (plus a comma).

Regards,
V?ctor