[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] VCD support for OS/2

[KO Myung-Hun]

Hi/2, long time no see. ^^

Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:10:51PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:32:02PM +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote:
>>     
>>> No more comments ?
>>>
>>> If so, apply please.
>>>       
>> Reimar, what do you say?  Are you happy with the patch now?
>>     
>
> Well, things like
>   
>> +        BYTE    bAdr     : 4;
>> +        BYTE    bControl : 4;
>>     
>
> aren't really correct since the bit order is implementation-defined.
> But if even the OS/2 developers themselves see it as so dead that they
> expect that nobody will ever write a new compiler for it and do not care
> about compatibility with possible future gcc versions I won't waste my
> time on it 

Huh ? It's just an old and boring rumor. OS/2 is being developed 
actively. So do compilers. What I meant is new compilers shall follow 
the current convention and should do due to the compatibility you said. 
I ported libcdio before this patch, and looked at the various definition 
for cd track. The following links are the case.

    
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/sys/cdio.h

    http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/lxr/source/include/linux/cdrom.h

Especially, in second case, it does not consider byte ordering with 
definition of cdrom_subchl and cdrom_tocentry even though it consider 
byte ordering in other parts.

In general cases, I agree with you absolutely. But this case is not.

> (though that leaves the question if the platform is worth
> including code for it).
>   

Respect the minorities.

> Also quite a few structs are duplicated again in the cddb patch, which
> again will complicate things when using a compiler (or
> different version or different compiler flags) that somehow lays the
> struct out differently.
>   

I think, that compiler would provide us with a way to lay struct out as 
what we want like '#pragma pack'. If even you're right, how can we use 
struct ? Your apprehension is excessive.

> IMHO this coding style makes maintenance difficult for no good reason,
> but I don't have the time to discuss this forever.
> Feel free to apply it as long as I don't get bothered with this code,
> ever.
>   

These codes never bother you. Trust me.

So apply this patch and cddb one as well, please.

-- 
KO Myung-Hun

Using Mozilla SeaMonkey 1.1.14
Under OS/2 Warp 4 for Korean with FixPak #15
On AMD ThunderBird 1 GHz with 512 MB RAM

Korean OS/2 User Community : http://www.ecomstation.co.kr