On 14-May-2010, at 14:21, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
>> I’ve been slowly rewriting the build logic to be
>> auto{conf,make}+libtool-driven (I’m targeting an expanded
>> set of platforms — OpenSolaris, Mac OS X and Linux — so
>> autoconf helps an awful lot).
>
> There was shock amongst other x264 developers (myself not included since I
> don't know enough about the merits of buildsystems to comment!) and ffmpeg
> developers as to why you created an autoconf fork of x264 and ffmpeg.
Heh, really? I haven’t paid enough attention to the respective project chatter,
clearly!
There’s not a lot in it, really, when their used on their own — x264 & ffmpeg’s
build logic[s?] are dandy. Problems arise when you start mixing and matching
autoconf and non-autoconf stuff, and have dependencies between the two, and
pass parameters into sub-projects’ configure scripts which would work fine if
it was a real autoconf but chokes (or worse… gets silently ignored) when it’s
not.
my goal is to drag together a whole bunch of different tools into a nice
convenient “Transmission Suite” package, covering DVB, MP4 containers, H.264,
AAC, the Ogg family, Dirac, and MHEG… all building nicely and neatly in a
single tree (dependencies dealt with automagically) which can then be installed
somewhere useful and relied upon by higher-level stuff to be in place and
configured in a consistent way.
that’s the plan, at least!
(In truth, I’ve not worked on any of this in a few weeks, and I was sorting out
the low-hanging fruit before getting stuck into the bigger stuff like Ingex,
x264 and ffmpeg)
M.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
