Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] MplayerXP vs Mplayer. Hall of truth.
I guess that non-GPL'ed code is not mplayer.c? :) It was never declared explicitly!!! Faszom.
Have to ask -- Went to my hungarian->english slang dictionary. Fasz = dick. What is Faszom? I'm guessing 'dickhead'. Seems like such a colorful language. ps My ex-wife is Hungarian (3rd gen) but she didn't speak it much. Unfortunately we're not on good terms so I can't ask her. I know her grandmama told her to kick her husbands hard on the alimony. She was listening, that's why I have to work so hard now. Maybe I should emigrate?
Only Mike Melanson said me that his stuff is GPL'ed. =2Eso just said on IRC: GUI and mpng code is _not_ GPL. (under standard "mplayer licence")
So delaying of licence's question doesn't increase mplayer's profit at al= l. Faszom. Nick, you didn't answer my question: exactly _WHAT_ do you want to achieve with this licensing issue? MPlayer _will_ be GPL in a few days! Do you plan WorldDominationXP(tm) until then??
--=20 Gabucino "I think the developers placed this bug intentionally, so the GUI won't run on specific systems. They are Debian-lovers, I see this from the docs." -- = lama
--Yylu36WmvOXNoKYn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8ljtTAq6GhkS0XDcRAhRRAJ4oJ8Xaglh1aPJCs6UWA5X6583jrgCgnAzu 4eQG9rnAocFs0jNdTBaIvWg= =CutA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Yylu36WmvOXNoKYn--
--__--__--
Message: 3 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:23:28 +0100 From: Roberto Togni <rtogni@bresciaonline.it> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Mplayer's licence (not a flame) Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On 2002.03.18 17:12 Nick Kurshev wrote:
Hello!
[...]
If you are author then PLEASE tell me - could I redistribute your stuff under GPL v2, what can be redistributed as separated work (LGPL like licence), what can be redistributed in binary form, and other conditions?
[...]
qtrpza - ???
Hi Nick.
You can redistribute qtrpza.c (and other patches I'll submit) under GPL v2 or LGPL.
The files included in mplayer will remain under mplayer licence.
Please note that this only covers my implementation, I don't know if there are any licence issuses with the codec algorithm itself.
Ciao, Roberto
--__--__--
Message: 4 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:51:24 +0100 (CET) From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Horv=E1th_Istv=E1n?= <suti@nuk.teteny.elte.hu> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] proposed new codecs.conf [Re: new video codec selection code] Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 06:14:58PM +0100, Gabucino wrote:
libmpeg2 is a little bit faster(on my system), and i think, in every system ...
Horv�th Istv�n didn't RTFM : libmpeg2 should be faster for Egger if we synced with main libmpeg2 tree, as it contains altivec enhancements.
oh yeah he uses ppc or something, eh?
rich
3 question, and one note 1) what is Egger 2) what is altivec 3) what is ppc
the note: i said that libmpeg2 faster than ffmpeg
--__--__--
Message: 5 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:55:22 -0500 To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] MplayerXP vs Mplayer. Hall of truth. From: D Richard Felker III <dalias@aerifal.cx> Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 09:45:23PM +0300, Nick Kurshev wrote:
Hello, Gabucino!
On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:50:13 +0100 you wrote:
Nick Kurshev didn't RTFM :
such slow systems (like p1 or old celerons) usually has no xv-capable cards but dga or vidix or xmga (1 buffers) could work there fine Middle size divx4 can be fitted into 2MB of video upto 7 times. It's not only about card, it's about X driver too!
I fixed vo_xv upto 10 buffers so version of X11 doesn't matter - you can grow it upto infinity.
Every commercial program can be compiled with GPL'ed shared object. LGPLed. not GPLed. It's disputable question It's not disputable, Arpi is right. This is why LGPL was invented.
Disputable - did you hear about int 0x80? What does mean the question there is .so files or not? If you can watch their names through ldd - it's not a problem. (For example mplayerxp already now loads divx4linux through dlopen so you are not able to find out that it uses this library without depth studing of the sources. But communicating with GPL'ed program (kernel) does present always under Linux. So it's not a question at all.
It is not disputable, at least as long as you are participating in ANY activity that involves copying, modifying, or distributing the GPL code. You may be able to convince a court to let you work around this is you never touch the GPL code yourself, and only make it easy for end users who obtained the GPL code from somewhere else to link it with your GPL-incompatible program, but you most definitely cannot do what you're saying if you distribute the GPL with your GPL-incompatible code or as a separate addon package for it. Why don't you try actually READING the GPL for once? Linking is linking, and it does not matter whether its static or dynamic.
BTW, although the whole issue has not been argued in court before, it *has* convinced fairly large companies to back down and GPL their whole programs, or move the GPL code to a separate program that's independent, multiple time in out-of-court settlements. So don't just take my word for it, do the research and stop babbling about things you know nothing about.
Rich
--__--__--
Message: 6 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:58:50 -0500 To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] proposed new codecs.conf [Re: new video codec selection code] From: D Richard Felker III <dalias@aerifal.cx> Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 07:44:30PM +0100, Daniel Egger wrote:
Am Mon, 2002-03-18 um 18.07 schrieb D Richard Felker III:
libmpeg2 is a TON faster for mpeg1 and 2.
Not for me. I optimised the shit out of ffmpeg on PowerPCs with AltiVec so finally the ac3 decoder is the hugest cpu consumer when watching CDs. Theoretically the builtin Rage Mobility chip could do iDCT in hardware but I never managed to get that running.
Also, ffmpeg seems to have problems continuing after dropped frames with mpeg1/2 (the video just freezes until the next keyframe when i use -framedrop), whereas libmpeg2 seems to do fine with a few dropped frames. This seems odd to me since -framedrop is only supposed to skip vo, not decoding (right?), but that's what seems to happen...
I'm seeing this problem with both codecs. For example when viewing DVDs and the drive just decided to spin down there's a vast jump in time but I expect that to be a buffering problem not one of the codec. I can well imagine that libmpeg2s read strategy prevents that.
That is definitely not the issue at hand on my end. I ensure that the drive does not spin down, and use mplayer's cache, so this has nothing to do with reading. Rather it's an issue with decoding, and lack of performance for decoding.
Rich
--__--__--
Message: 7 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 13:24:05 -0700 (MST) From: Mike Melanson <melanson@pcisys.net> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Mplayer's licence (not a flame) Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Roberto Togni wrote:
Please note that this only covers my implementation, I don't know if there are any licence issuses with the codec algorithm itself.
Heh, imagine the legal nastygram: "...Your program includes intellectual property that belongs to Apple computer. You are hereby ordered to cease and desist using the Apple Graphics (rpza) codec, a codec that no one cares about now or even back when it was first released, and provide proof that you have complied with this nastygram..."
:) -- -Mike Melanson
--__--__--
Message: 8 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 22:11:54 +0100 From: Alban Bedel <albeu@free.fr> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Mplayer's licence (not a flame) Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
Hi Nick Kurshev,
on Mon, 18 Mar 2002 19:12:57 +0300 you wrote:
You can use all that I writed under GPL or (if really needed) LGPL as you want. I writed playtree* asxparser.* input/*. In libmpdemux : demux_audio.c demux_ogg.c and demux_demuxers.c. Also I'm not the author but did some stuff in cfgparser.* (extended for per-entry config). Albeu
--__--__--
Message: 9 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 22:48:19 +0100 From: Arpi <arpi@thot.banki.hu> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Mplayer's licence (not a flame) Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
Hi,
Also I'm not the author but did some stuff in cfgparser.* (extended for per- entry config).
btw, could you add the already (donno by who) requested 'list' type? so, for example parameter '-vcpri mpeg12,ffdivx,h263xa' be parsed to a char* _array_ containing comma-separated elements instead of a single string?
i don't really understand that cfgparser source...
A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team
-- Developer of MPlayer, the Movie Player for Linux - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu
--__--__--
Message: 10 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 22:11:33 +0100 From: Tobias Diedrich <td@informatik.uni-hannover.de> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: Color Subtitles ? Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
Tobias Diedrich wrote:
Can the mplayer subtitle/osd engine handle color subtitles or is that a no-go for now ?
Hmm, seems to be impossible without a big rewrite of the subtitle code... *sigh* Also the YV12 code looks incomplete. It does not touch the y/v-Planes, which probably is why it seems transparent even though it should be nearly opaque...
-- Tobias PGP: 0x9AC7E0BC Hannover Fantreffen ML: mailto:fantreffen-request@mantrha.de?subject=subscribe Manga & Anime Treff Hannover: http://www.mantrha.de/
--__--__--
Message: 11 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 00:00:22 +0100 From: Arpi <arpi@thot.banki.hu> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: [MPlayer-dev-eng] english documentation maintaining Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
Hi,
Gabucino's interest over mplayer documentation decreased a lot, too lot, in last months. No wonder, I personally hate documentation writting/maintaining. Anyway I got it and updated as far as i can a week ago. I'ev fixed many things, but i'm sure there are still a lot. And I didn't touched all file, nor manpages, just documentation.html, bugreports.html and video.html, and checked only by technical side, not grammar.
Anyway he still refuses to make trivial changes, about new -lavcopts or the audio-only playback.... RTCW 'testing' is much more important? But it doesn't matter, he really did nice work on docs in the past.
Anyway we're getting closer to the next release. My latest changes on init/uninit and codec selection seems to work fine (if you disagree - read bugreports.html) and solved most of strange bugs, so we have a step forward a bit.
But back to the docs. It must be up-to-date, otherwise we should stop RTFMing users :) Gabu also refused to apply Diego's text-only patches, dunno why :( (he said it was procmail... he-he. he should ask Nick how to make /dev/null to be a folder;))
So, I'm searching for doc co-maintainer (or maybe new maintainer - it depends on Gabucino if he wants to continue maintaining docs or he chooses RTCW testing forever)
Primary goals: - make and keep it up-to-date with mplayer options, features etc - extend it (especially FAQ) depending on -users mailings - review and keep up-to-date the AUTHORS section - fix HTML syntax bugs (unclosed <B> etc) - receive, verify and apply doc updates/patches from people - document the new input system (i think only Albeu can do that?)
Long-term: - remove tables, they make source unreadable, and i doubt they are really required in the FAQ for example. - convert it to some better format, docbook or xhtml? it depends on maintainer - if he refuses docbook then it won't work... - reorganize it, remove redundant stuff, make it more searchable etc.
Do NOT flame. I want to see patches and CVS commits. No discussions about pro/contra over doc file formats etc. Who will maintaining docs? - he will decide the format. Easy.
Sorry for being rude, but the flame/discussions about docs were already too long, with no results. And the docs are still outdated and sometimes badly organized, not talking about html bugs sometimes appearing even in netscape.
So, any volunteers?
A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team
-- Developer of MPlayer, the Movie Player for Linux - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu
--__--__--
Message: 12 Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 23:51:22 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-2?B?R+Fib3IgTOlu4XJ0?= <lgb@lgb.hu> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] proposed new codecs.conf [Re: new video codec selection code] Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:51:24PM +0100, Horv�th Istv�n wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 06:14:58PM +0100, Gabucino wrote:
libmpeg2 is a little bit faster(on my system), and i think, in every system ...
Horv�th Istv�n didn't RTFM : libmpeg2 should be faster for Egger if we synced with main libmpeg2 tree, as it contains altivec enhancements.
oh yeah he uses ppc or something, eh?
rich
3 question, and one note 1) what is Egger
Daniel Egger, one of our list members, like you. Just please read the thread you want to write into ;-) His mails are here too nearby yours :)
2) what is altivec
Dunno, sounds like an old russian hoover ...
3) what is ppc
PowerPC ?
- G�bor
--__--__--
Message: 13 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 00:13:27 +0100 From: Arpi <arpi@thot.banki.hu> To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayer.dev.hu Subject: Re: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] proposed new codecs.conf [Re: new video codec selection code] Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu
Hi,
2) what is altivec
Dunno, sounds like an old russian hoover ...
simd instruction set of some (ppc?) cpu, like mmx on x86
3) what is ppc
PowerPC ?
4) who is rt(f)m ? :)
A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team
-- Developer of MPlayer, the Movie Player for Linux - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu
--__--__--
_______________________________________________ MPlayer-dev-eng mailing list MPlayer-dev-eng@mplayerhq.hu http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-dev-eng
End of MPlayer-dev-eng Digest
participants (2)
-
Alex Beregszaszi -
Daniel B. Miller