[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-user] configure can't find existing x264 installationon Debian
Fri Nov 14 13:45:18 CET 2008
On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 11:51 +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Panagiotis Issaris wrote:
> > Hi Baptiste,
> > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 19:41 -0800, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >> Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> >> > On Nov 13, 2008, at 6:03 PM, Stephen Dewey wrote:
> >> >> Actually, just running svn update and recompiling seemed to take
> >> >> care of
> >> >> this issue for me. The problem seems to already be fixed in SVN,
> >> >> although perhaps only coincidentally.
> >> >> All problems solved! Thanks everybody!!
> >> >
> >> > Excellent!
> >> >
> >> > I do, however, have to question related to this issues:
> >> > 1. shouldn't we finally make -cvslog list readonly so
> >> > that any comments get posted to -devel ? While
> >> > hunting down the commit that fixed the problem
> >> > I realized that Uoti has commented on the original
> >> > commit over at -cvslog. Of course, I overlooked his
> >> > email, since I don't actively track -cvslog.
> >> I find easier to answer to the related commit.
> >> > 2. Why don't we have any regression tests for H.264?
> >> > If it is a simple matter of adding some -- I can try to
> >> > take care of that tomorrow.
> >> Basically because we have no encoder, however we could put samples in
> >> the test suite, it's in TODO AFAIK.
> > Or we could add a basic encoder... ;-)
> I am quite strongly opposed to adding basic (i.e. crap) versions of
> anything, more so when a perfectly good external library exists and
> is supported.
I disagree. Furthermore, even though libvorbis existed, a Vorbis encoder
> If a basic version exists, users will fail to enable
> the proper support, and they'll get bad encoding results, ultimately
> tarnishing the reputation of FFmpeg.
Same could be said for adding a Vorbis encoder:
And frankly, I disagree cause one can disable it by default or in some
other way give the external and higher quality encoder the priority. But
again, even that is not what happened in the Vorbis case.
> Furthermore, a trivial H.264,
> if such a thing exists, will not exercise much of the decoder.
The problem fixed with commit 15816 would have been caught. And problems
concerning CAVLC, the deblocking filter, the transform, motion vector
encoding, ... could all be caught. Indeed there's lots of features that
would not be tested, but I fail to agree that testing nothing is better
then testing the basics.
> I know you wrote a very basic H.264 encoder. Don't take this personally.
If you just had left out the "crap", you wouldn't have had to add this
With friendly regards,
More information about the ffmpeg-devel