On 2016-03-26 09:46:02 +0100, Vittorio Giovara wrote: > --- > tests/fate/screen.mak | 13 +++++++++++-- > tests/ref/fate/screenpresso | 5 ----- > tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-16bit | 9 +++++++++ > tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-24bit | 11 +++++++++++ > tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-32bit | 5 +++++ > 5 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > delete mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/screenpresso > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-16bit > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-24bit > create mode 100644 tests/ref/fate/screenpresso-32bit > > diff --git a/tests/fate/screen.mak b/tests/fate/screen.mak > index 502645e..c44045d 100644 > --- a/tests/fate/screen.mak > +++ b/tests/fate/screen.mak > @@ -53,8 +53,17 @@ fate-rscc-32bit: CMD = framecrc -i > $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/rscc/32bpp.avi -an > FATE_SAMPLES_AVCONV-$(call DEMDEC, AVI, RSCC) += $(FATE_RSCC) > fate-rscc: $(FATE_RSCC) > > -FATE_SAMPLES_AVCONV-$(call DEMDEC, AVI, SCREENPRESSO) += fate-screenpresso > -fate-screenpresso: CMD = framecrc -i $(TARGET_SAMPLES)/spv1/bunny.avi
same comment wrt fate sample repo size, just rename this test to fate-screenpresso-24bit and don't add the 24bpp.avi I also have doubt's these crc are correct due to the wrong keyframe test. That is hard to detect if you remove the only exisiting fate test in the same patch set. Did you ran fate on the screenpresso patches without this patch? Janne _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
