On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 01:08:32PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:47:04 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:20:01PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 23:49:00 +0100
> > > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 10:33:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:47:04 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:20:01PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 23:49:00 +0100
> > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 10:33:53PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > > Otherwise, you could lose the alpha wh
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:20:01PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 23:49:00 +0100
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 10:33:53PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > > Otherwise, you could lose the alpha when handling pixel formats in an
> > > opaque manner (i.e. when you don't spe
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 23:49:00 +0100
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 10:33:53PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> > Otherwise, you could lose the alpha when handling pixel formats in an
> > opaque manner (i.e. when you don't special-case PAL8).
> >
> > The special case for av_get_pix_fmt_los
wm4 googlemail.com> writes:
> > > Fate still passes.
> >
> > I am not sure transparency is tested by fate.
> > Did you test with a pal8 image with transparency?
>
> Do you have one at hand?
Ticket #2158 contains one.
(pal8 output of libswscale is currently always opaque.)
Carl Eugen
On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 10:33:53PM +0100, wm4 wrote:
> Otherwise, you could lose the alpha when handling pixel formats in an
> opaque manner (i.e. when you don't special-case PAL8).
>
> The special case for av_get_pix_fmt_loss()/av_find_best_pix_fmt_of_2()
> is now redundant and can be removed.
>
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 22:36:45 + (UTC)
Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> wm4 googlemail.com> writes:
>
> > Fate still passes.
>
> I am not sure transparency is tested by fate.
> Did you test with a pal8 image with transparency?
Do you have one at hand?
> > -((pixdesc)->nb_components == 2 || (pi
wm4 googlemail.com> writes:
> Fate still passes.
I am not sure transparency is tested by fate.
Did you test with a pal8 image with transparency?
> -((pixdesc)->nb_components == 2 || (pixdesc)->nb_components == 4
> || (pixdesc)->flags & AV_PIX_FMT_FLAG_PAL)
> +((pixdesc)->nb_components
Otherwise, you could lose the alpha when handling pixel formats in an
opaque manner (i.e. when you don't special-case PAL8).
The special case for av_get_pix_fmt_loss()/av_find_best_pix_fmt_of_2()
is now redundant and can be removed.
---
Fate still passes.
---
libavutil/pixdesc.c | 4 ++--
libavut
