[FFmpeg-user] 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration

[Carl Eugen Hoyos]

2017-02-12 5:36 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net>:
>
> Am 12.02.2017 um 03:30 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos:
>>
>> 2017-02-12 3:23 GMT+01:00 Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net>:
>>
>>> gcc-6.3.1-1.fc24.x86_64
>>
>> gcc.gnu.org doesn't know this release;-)
>>
>> Anyway: Please understand that several hundred real, user-reported,
>> reproducible bugs exist in current FFmpeg, some of them regressions.
>> I hope you agree that compiler bugs are not our priority...
>> (It's bad enough that we have to invest time in "undefined behaviour"
>> where no compiler ever failed.)
>
> no i do *not* agree beause some some of that warnings may the
> reason for unfixed bugs

I wonder what "may" means here...

> things like "src/libavcodec/mpegvideo.c:960:17: warning: this
> 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]" are a clear
> indication that this code should be reviewed

Please do;-)

> and to be frankly where i develop software (though not in C/C++ but that
> don't matter) i first keep my house clean and fix any warnings software can

Sounds as if we found a new contributor - welcome!

> detected automatically and *then* consider to waste my time trying to
> reprodce things which could have been gone by get rid of all the code smell

It's funny that you wrote this mail a few hours after I fixed most
of the current warnings - or "several" if you prefer.
(Yes, we do exactly what you ask for, I just request that you realize
fixing these warnings practically never fixes a real issue, while we
know about many - ! - real issues including remote DOS, regressions
on valid input files and sometimes subtle change of behaviour, both
intended and unintended.)

>> That's apart from the fact that --extra-cflags and --extra-ldflags
>> generally make bug reports invalid (as you correctly indicated)
>> except for paths and libraries
>
> you still refused to answer my question if you did a LTO build as you

(You refused to answer my question.)

> pretended you can't reporduce it, as you always request full input
> of ffmpeg command lines why don't you do the same?

I was hoping my original comment made it crystal-clear that I did
try to reproduce the issues you saw.

> src/libavformat/rtpdec_formats.h:41:5: warning: type of
> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' does not match original declaration
> [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>      ^
> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note:
> 'ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet' was previously declared here
>  int ff_h264_handle_aggregated_packet(AVFormatContext *ctx, PayloadContext
> *data, AVPacket *pkt,
>      ^
> src/libavformat/rtpdec_h264.c:206:5: note: code may be misoptimized unless
> -fno-strict-aliasing is used

So what is your initial analysis of this warning?
(You can find mine above, the line starts with "I hope".)

Carl Eugen