> it is a pain in the neck for people who need to be spoon fed. I was > giving a answer to a person who was having a difficulty compilling > mplayer. I didnt discuss the merits or demerits of the solution. I > would suggest you look up what those two options actually do.
i am facing problems with mplayer compiled in gcc 2.96 ... it is damn slow on an RHL 7.3 box ( PIII 700, 64 MB RAM) running gnome. on my home box with debian woody 3.0 (gcc 2.95) mplayer compiled fine and with a few teaks in the ./configure i managed to even play movies and stuff. but the movies run really slow. the home box is a cyrix PR 233, 96 MB RAM system running kde > > > If you stay subscribed to the mailling list a bit longer you will find > out that no one has ever faced a problem using mplayer compiled with > gcc 2.96 even though mplayer says it is not recommended. thanx for the solution, but mplayer only says that 2.96 is "not recommended", not that it "won't compile". It also says that with 2.96 it'll just run a little slow and might give some problems. Let's face it, mplayer configuration is a bit tough but then it's free software - you use it if u like it or use something else. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte Server Certificate: http://www.gothawte.com/rd524.html _______________________________________________ linux-india-help mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-india-help
