On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:06:11PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 21/05/15 11:59, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:00:56AM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> >> [..]
> >> Why is this "guessing" code in mxfenc? This should be
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:37:36AM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> On 21/05/15 15:04, tim nicholson wrote:
>
> > Please don't waste any more time fiddling with this, I expect it will
> > suddenly click in my brain when I least expect it. Oh hang on I think it
> > just did, you superimpose the second
On 21/05/15 15:04, tim nicholson wrote:
> Please don't waste any more time fiddling with this, I expect it will
> suddenly click in my brain when I least expect it. Oh hang on I think it
> just did, you superimpose the second art on top of the first so the 3 is
> on top of the X but the 4 is betwe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21/05/15 11:59, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:00:56AM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
>> [..]
>> Why is this "guessing" code in mxfenc? This should be something that'
s
>> taken care of before calling any muxer (like in
>> avfor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21/05/15 11:47, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:20:48AM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 19/05/15 16:50, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21/05/15 11:29, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:20:48AM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 19/05/15 16:50, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42P
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:00:56AM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 15:35 +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> > On 19/05/15 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> > >> On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >>>
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:20:48AM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 19/05/15 16:50, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:20:48AM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 19/05/15 16:50, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/05/15 16:50, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 19/05/15 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24P
On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 15:35 +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> On 19/05/15 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> >> On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>> The default is assumed to be 0xFF, which is what the 2009 spec lists
>
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 03:35:42PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 19/05/15 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> >> On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>> The default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/05/15 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
>> On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> The default is assumed to be 0xFF, which is what the 2009 spec lists
,
>>> the older ver
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:07:24PM +0100, tim nicholson wrote:
> On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > The default is assumed to be 0xFF, which is what the 2009 spec lists,
> > the older version i have lists 0 as the default.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer
> > ---
> > lib
On 19/05/15 01:33, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> The default is assumed to be 0xFF, which is what the 2009 spec lists,
> the older version i have lists 0 as the default.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer
> ---
> libavformat/mxfenc.c| 28 +
> tests/ref/la
The default is assumed to be 0xFF, which is what the 2009 spec lists,
the older version i have lists 0 as the default.
Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer
---
libavformat/mxfenc.c| 28 +
tests/ref/lavf/mxf | 12 +--
tests/ref/lavf/mxf_d
16 matches
Mail list logo
