On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:38 PM, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/1/2015 10:35 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:08 PM, James Almer wrote:
>>> On 12/1/2015 9:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
There was no reason AFAIK for making
On 12/1/2015 9:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> There was no reason AFAIK for making AV_CRC_24_IEEE 12. This simply
> resulted in wasted space under --enable-hardcoded-tables:
> dynamic: 1318672 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
> old: 1330680 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
> new: 1326488
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:08 PM, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/1/2015 9:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> There was no reason AFAIK for making AV_CRC_24_IEEE 12. This simply
>> resulted in wasted space under --enable-hardcoded-tables:
>> dynamic: 1318672 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:38 PM, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/1/2015 10:35 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:08 PM, James Almer wrote:
>>> On 12/1/2015 9:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
There was no reason AFAIK for making
There was no reason AFAIK for making AV_CRC_24_IEEE 12. This simply
resulted in wasted space under --enable-hardcoded-tables:
dynamic: 1318672 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
old: 1330680 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
new: 1326488 libavutil/libavutil.so.55
Minor version number is bumped, with
On 12/1/2015 10:35 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:08 PM, James Almer wrote:
>> On 12/1/2015 9:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>>> There was no reason AFAIK for making AV_CRC_24_IEEE 12. This simply
>>> resulted in wasted space under