On 2018/3/4 6:16, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:10:48PM -0300, James Almer wrote: >> On 3/3/2018 6:41 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 08:16:11AM +0800, Jun Zhao wrote: >>>> bitstream_filters.texi | 11 ++++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>> 27c05404d9fabe5065e418c4cc09629d53aee1a1 >>>> 0001-doc-bitstream_filters-correct-dump_extra-bsfs-docs.patch >>>> From 0a0a10824511ef9d5b3c49ee652a918603841826 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>> From: Jun Zhao <jun.z...@intel.com> >>>> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:53:05 +0800 >>>> Subject: [PATCH V2] doc/bitstream_filters: correct dump_extra bsfs docs. >>>> >>>> Update dump_extra bit stream filter docs to follow current >>>> code implement. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jun Zhao <jun.z...@intel.com> >>>> Reviewed-by: Steven Liu <l...@onvideo.cn> >>>> --- >>>> doc/bitstream_filters.texi | 11 ++++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> i hoped a little that the a option could one day be >>> cleanly restored in the implementation. >>> but keeping the docs incorrect is not helping >> You mean adding it as it's defined in the removed portion of the doxy >> from this patch (local_header flag2)? >> Sounds like a better idea, as it would help replace the >> av_parser_change() call in ffmpeg.c with this bsf. I'll take a look. > yes Now, we can get specific help/option information for decoder/encoder/demuxer/muxer/filter like this: ffmpeg -h encoder=libx264, how about implement specific bsf help like ffmpeg -h bsf=dump_filter? I think even if the guys forget update the man-page, we can get correct option information from cmd.
If is Ok, I will try to work for this. Thanks. > > [...] > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
