Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 10:44:46 Michael Orlitzky <[email protected]> napisał(a):
> On 02/02/2015 09:12 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >
> >> What are your thoughts?
> >
> > In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or libav
> > as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to introduce
> > two (ffmpeg_impl_ffmpeg and ffmpeg_impl_libav), but of the 4 possible
> > combinations only 2 are valid. So you need a REQUIRED_USE to forbid
> > some combinations.
> >
> > Please spare us of this.
> >
>
> Why do we need two flags for this? Wouldn't a single global
> USE=ffmpeg_impl_libav have exactly the desired behavior?
Maybe. Though it still will keep the confusion of !libav meaning ffmpeg.
I mean:
ffmpeg? (
!libav? ( ffmpeg )
libav? ( ffmpeg )
)
(or without the outer 'ffmpeg?'). In your variant:
ffmpeg? (
!ffmpeg_impl_libav? ( ffmpeg )
ffmpeg_impl_libav? ( ffmpeg )
)
Maybe a little cleaner but still relies on the implicit thing. Not to
mention the user is supposed to set either:
FFMPEG_IMPL=libav
or:
FFMPEG_IMPL=
which is nowhere close to sane :).
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
pgps1Uqc3SzWL.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
