On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:29:22AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 08:47:45PM +0100, Kostya Shishkov wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 07:11:21PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:56:09PM +0100, Kostya Shishkov wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:32:08AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > --- a/libavformat/bethsoftvid.c
> > > > > +++ b/libavformat/bethsoftvid.c
> > > > > @@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ static int read_frame(BVID_DemuxContext *vid,
> > > > > AVIOContext *pb, AVPacket *pkt,
> > > > > return AVERROR(ENOMEM);
> > > > > vid->video_index = st->index;
> > > > > if (vid->audio_index < 0) {
> > > > > - av_log_ask_for_sample(s, "No audio packet before first
> > > > > video "
> > > > > - "packet. Using default video time
> > > > > base.\n");
> > > > > + avpriv_request_sample(s, "Using default video time base.
> > > > > "
> > > > > + "No audio packet before first
> > > > > video packet");
> > > >
> > > > I'd rather leave it as it was because it's logical - first you tell
> > > > what's
> > > > wrong and then report what you do in this situation.
> > >
> > > I did this because avpriv_request_sample() gives different output, i.e.
> > > it continues the string it is provided with
> > >
> > > " is not implemented. Update your Libav version ..."
> > >
> > > so the end of the provided message has to be the beginnning of the
> > > "is-not-implemented" sentence.
> >
> > Maybe it's worth making that a separate informative message? It's hardly has
> > anything to do with the missing feature itself.</Drahteselbaracke>
>
> What about
>
> Using default video time base since having no audio packet before the
> first video packet [is not implemented. ...]
maybe OK
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
libav-devel@libav.org
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
