On 22 February 2018 at 22:53, Marton Balint <c...@passwd.hu> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Ricardo Constantino wrote:
>
> On 22 February 2018 at 22:22, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 2018-02-22 20:26 GMT+01:00 Marton Balint <c...@passwd.hu>:
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Nicolas George wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Marton Balint (2018-02-20):
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The patch might has merits even if the library remains in the NONFREE
>>> >>> section, no?
>>> >>
>>> >> I see more code and easier circumvention of the GPL, but no merit.
>>> >> Please be more specific.
>>> >
>>> > I guess the biggest advantage of dynamic loading is that it can use the
>>> > environment variable for finding the library, this approach is
>>> documented /
>>> > encouraged in the NDI SDK.
>>>
>>> This doesn't sound convincing imo: Does the company distribute
>>> the dynamic library with different names?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, different names for each OS.
>>
>
> I think what CE ment was static v.s. dynamic lib names, but what you write
> is true as well, the library has different names on different OS-es/archs,
> I am not even sure NDI stuff builds for windows, I always tested linux only.
>
> With dynamic loading we can rely on the library name defined in the NDI
> SDK headers which should be the proper one for each OS/arch.
>

Except non-MSVC compilers for Windows, which Newtek seems to think is the
exclusive way to compile for Windows.


>
> Regards,
> Marton
>
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

Reply via email to