[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] ffprobe: Fix incorrect display of closed_captions property

[Soft Works]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Soft Works
> Sent: Sunday, 19 September 2021 00:38
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] ffprobe: Fix incorrect display of
> closed_captions property
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Andreas
> > Rheinhardt
> > Sent: Sunday, 19 September 2021 00:16
> > To: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] ffprobe: Fix incorrect display
> of
> > closed_captions property
> >
> > Soft Works:
> > > Repro Example:
> > > ffprobe -show_entries stream=closed_captions:disposition=:side_data=
> > "http://streams.videolan.org/streams/ts/CC/NewsStream-608-ac3.ts"
> > >
> > > While the codec string includes "Closed Captions",
> > > the stream data is showing: closed_captions=0
> > >
> > > The test ref was incorrect as the test media file
> > > actually does have cc.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: softworkz <softworkz at hotmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2: Fix test result. It was undiscovered locally as make fate
> > >     does not seem to properly rebuild ffprobe.
> > >
> >
> > This test and several others in demux.mak are indeed missing an ffprobe
> > dependency. Will fix it. (A full fate-run should have nevertheless
> > rebuilt ffprobe, but maybe it only rebuilt it after having run these
> tests?)
> 
> I have a clean setup on a Uubuntu VM where I do nothing but running
> FATE.
> 
> I did 'git pull' and then ran FATE which passed.
> 
> 
> I had recently seen a similar issue which still reproduces for me:
> 
> make distclean
> ./configure
> make -j8 fate SAMPLES=...
> 
> It errors at some point, but it doesn't error when I either
> make ffprobe before or when I do not use the "-j8" parameter.
> 

That essentially aligns with what you said:

> > rebuilt ffprobe, but maybe it only rebuilt it after having run these
> tests?)

ffprobe might get re-built at some point but when not building 
sequentially it might be built too late.

Maybe just some but not all depending tests are marked to depend
on ffprobe?

softworkz