On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 10:34:03PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 08:50:17AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > On 08/08/2012 02:42 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > ---
> > > libavcodec/x86/Makefile | 6 +++---
> > > libavcodec/x86/{dsputil_yasm.asm => dsputil.asm} | 0
> > > .../x86/{dsputilenc_yasm.asm => dsputilenc.asm} | 0
> > > libavcodec/x86/{vc1dsp_yasm.asm => vc1dsp.asm} | 0
> > > 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > rename libavcodec/x86/{dsputil_yasm.asm => dsputil.asm} (100%)
> > > rename libavcodec/x86/{dsputilenc_yasm.asm => dsputilenc.asm} (100%)
> > > rename libavcodec/x86/{vc1dsp_yasm.asm => vc1dsp.asm} (100%)
> >
> > Currently asm is always yasm/nasm so possibly we could drop them, Loren
> > pointed that we might end up generating objects with the same name so we
> > might avoid that by flattening
> >
> > .asm -> .asm.o
> > .c -> .c.o
> >
> > and so on, not sure if it is worthy.
>
> If at all, the rule should be amended for the .asm files. It would be
> very weird to not compile .c files into .o files anymore.
>
> Now it's true that some other names in that directory could also be
> improved and I may even get to it eventually, but can we please get
> this in as a first step and work our way up from there? Discussing
> what to do with the _mmx files should not delay renaming _yasm files.
.. ping ..
Diego
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
