James Almer gmail.com> writes:
> Why does configure even check for 2.x if the actual
> lavc wrappers don't currently support it?
It is possible to use openjpeg2 with current
FFmpeg (I use it for testing) but it is
everything but user-friendly.
Carl Eugen
Michael Bradshaw gmail.com> writes:
> tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1.
> Currently, I've opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I
> proceed with preparing this patch for submission, or
> should I alter it to keep 1.5 support?
Do distributions support (contain) 2.x?
Carl
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 09:03:43AM -0700, Michael Bradshaw wrote:
> tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1. Currently, I've
> opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I proceed with preparing this patch for
> submission, or should I alter it to keep 1.5 support?
>
>
>
> The
Le tridi 3 brumaire, an CCXXIV, Ganesh Ajjanagadde a écrit :
> Definitely not. Even Arch Linux, generally an early adopter, does not
> use openjpeg2, but instead openjpeg for most things.
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/openjpeg2/
Are you sure of your statement?
Regards,
--
On 24.10.2015 18:59, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Bradshaw gmail.com> writes:
>
>> tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1.
>> Currently, I've opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I
>> proceed with preparing this patch for submission, or
>> should I alter it to keep 1.5
tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1. Currently, I've
opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I proceed with preparing this patch for
submission, or should I alter it to keep 1.5 support?
The OpenJPEG API went through a bit of an overhaul in the 1.x to 2.x
transition. This
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Bradshaw gmail.com> writes:
>
>> tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1.
>> Currently, I've opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I
>> proceed with preparing this patch for submission, or
>>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le tridi 3 brumaire, an CCXXIV, Ganesh Ajjanagadde a écrit :
>> Definitely not. Even Arch Linux, generally an early adopter, does not
>> use openjpeg2, but instead openjpeg for most things.
>
>
Le tridi 3 brumaire, an CCXXIV, Ganesh Ajjanagadde a écrit :
> I did not say it is not present, just that more packages rely on
> openjpeg instead of openjpeg2.
Ok. But having it available is enough, we do not really care how many other
programs use it, only that Michael, the maintainer for this
On 10/24/2015 1:03 PM, Michael Bradshaw wrote:
> tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1. Currently, I've
> opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I proceed with preparing this patch for
> submission, or should I alter it to keep 1.5 support?
>
>
>
> The OpenJPEG API went
Le tridi 3 brumaire, an CCXXIV, James Almer a écrit :
> No idea about other distros, but in any case, if there's any that doesn't
> ship it then we should keep supporting it for a while, even if it means
> adding some ugly macros.
Depending on the ugliness of the macros, maybe duplicating the
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Timothy Gu wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:03 AM James Almer wrote:
>
> > Gentoo and Debian both seem to ship it. Arch does as well but on their
> > Community repository (ffmpeg adopting it may be incentive enough
On Sat, 24 Oct, 2015 at 21:37:57 GMT, Michael Bradshaw wrote:
> Crap, you're right. Before I started this I checked if Ubuntu had openjpeg2
> and they do[1] but it turns out it's really just openjpeg 1.3 (if anyone
> knows why they made a separate package named libopenjpeg2 when it's really
>
On Saturday, 24 October 2015 at 18:59, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Bradshaw gmail.com> writes:
>
> > tl;dr: I've got a patch that updates OpenJPEG to 2.0/2.1.
> > Currently, I've opted to drop OpenJPEG 1.5. Should I
> > proceed with preparing this patch for submission, or
> > should I
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> James Almer gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Why does configure even check for 2.x if the actual
> > lavc wrappers don't currently support it?
>
> It is possible to use openjpeg2 with current
> FFmpeg (I use it for testing)
15 matches
Mail list logo