Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:09:15PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes: >> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 04:09:13AM +0100, Mans Rullgard wrote: >> >> This is required with oldish nasm versions still shipped with some >> >> systems. Without this patch, the code still builds but due to >> >> a bug[1] crashes at runtime even if avx is not used. >> >> >> >> --- >> >> libavcodec/x86/h264_deblock.asm | 10 ++++++++++ >> >> libavcodec/x86/h264_deblock_10bit.asm | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> >> libavcodec/x86/h264dsp_mmx.c | 2 +- >> >> libavcodec/x86/imdct36_sse.asm | 4 ++++ >> >> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > You missed instances in >> > >> > libavcodec/x86/proresdsp.asm >> > libavresample/x86/audio_mix.asm >> > libswscale/x86/input.asm >> > libswscale/x86/output.asm >> > >> > I wonder if we shouldn't maybe blacklist that nasm version instead. >> >> You were the one insisting on supporting whatever is in debian stale. > > I insist in the sense that we should either support it properly or error > out during configure. Right now configure does some tests reaching the > conclusion that everything should be fine and then compilation fails. > This situation is untenable.
You are overreacting. > If blacklisting nasm 2.08 allows us to eliminate the AVX ifdefs, then > I can perfectly live with that. It's quite possibly the cleanest > long-term solution. The bug in question was fixed in nasm 2.09.04. > Also note that Debian stable does contain yasm 0.8, which assembles libav > just fine. Then why do we care what nasm version it has? We always use yasm if that exists. There's not even a configure flag to do otherwise. Now that's debian. What about other systems, like cygwin? Or AncientBSD? -- Måns Rullgård [email protected] _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
