Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2017-01-02 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Tuesday 2016-12-13 00:16:24 +0100, Andreas Cadhalpun encoded: > On 10.12.2016 17:55, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > From ebc34da37648a07f25da94a1662c278c13ca7383 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Nicolas George > > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42:41 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH]

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-12 Thread Andreas Cadhalpun
On 10.12.2016 17:55, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > From ebc34da37648a07f25da94a1662c278c13ca7383 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Nicolas George > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42:41 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer > > With several modifications and documentation by

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-10 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Sunday 2016-12-04 22:54:21 +0100, Andreas Cadhalpun encoded: > On 31.10.2016 09:51, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > From 7f209e27aa33e8f43444e5cfc44c68f664b69e06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Nicolas George > > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42:41 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH]

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-09 Thread Andreas Cadhalpun
On 09.12.2016 15:55, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Friday 2016-11-25 11:58:42 +0100, Nicolas George encoded: >> Le quintidi 5 frimaire, an CCXXV, Andreas Cadhalpun a écrit : >>> I think a better idea would be to require '-strict experimental', >>> as code disabled by default does neither get

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-09 Thread Hendrik Leppkes
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le nonidi 19 frimaire, an CCXXV, Stefano Sabatini a écrit : >> -strict is for codecs, there is no such thing at the moment for >> muxers/demuxers (so it should be implemented for muxers/demuxers). > > AVFormatContext has

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-09 Thread Nicolas George
Le nonidi 19 frimaire, an CCXXV, Stefano Sabatini a écrit : > -strict is for codecs, there is no such thing at the moment for > muxers/demuxers (so it should be implemented for muxers/demuxers). AVFormatContext has strict_std_compliance too. Regards, -- Nicolas George

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-09 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Friday 2016-11-25 11:58:42 +0100, Nicolas George encoded: > Le quintidi 5 frimaire, an CCXXV, Andreas Cadhalpun a écrit : > > I think a better idea would be to require '-strict experimental', > > as code disabled by default does neither get build- nor FATE-tested > > much. > > That is an

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-04 Thread Andreas Cadhalpun
On 04.12.2016 23:42, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote: > On 4 December 2016 at 21:54, Andreas Cadhalpun < > andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> As I already wrote elsewhere, I don't think disabling this by default is >> good, >> as it will likely cause it to bitrot. Better require '-strict >>

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-04 Thread Nicolas George
Le quartidi 14 frimaire, an CCXXV, Rostislav Pehlivanov a écrit : > What about the security reasons listed below? They do not exist any more than in any similar code. They were invoked by people who did not like this patch, and the warning was added to accommodate them. Regards, -- Nicolas

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-04 Thread Rostislav Pehlivanov
On 4 December 2016 at 21:54, Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 31.10.2016 09:51, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > From 7f209e27aa33e8f43444e5cfc44c68f664b69e06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Nicolas George > > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42:41 +0100

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-12-04 Thread Andreas Cadhalpun
On 31.10.2016 09:51, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > From 7f209e27aa33e8f43444e5cfc44c68f664b69e06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Nicolas George > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42:41 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer > > With several modifications and documentation by

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-25 Thread Nicolas George
Le quintidi 5 frimaire, an CCXXV, Andreas Cadhalpun a écrit : > I think a better idea would be to require '-strict experimental', > as code disabled by default does neither get build- nor FATE-tested > much. That is an excellent idea! Regards, -- Nicolas George

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-24 Thread Andreas Cadhalpun
On 24.11.2016 12:36, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > I think the most important controversy points revolve around these facts: > > * developers do not want to add support for an internal only format, > which adds to the maintainance burden with no clear benefit, since > there are no clear use cases

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-24 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Tuesday 2016-11-01 15:49:12 +0100, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:45:00AM -0300, James Almer wrote: [...] > > Libavformat is not a dumping ground for code molded by a single person's > > specific needs, and it is not a library meant to hold your or anyone's > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-03 Thread Nicolas George
Le primidi 11 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > No. You insist this is about technical merits, and i already mentioned this > is not about that. What else is there? > I'll repeat what i said. This is not a technical discussion. This is a > design issue. I really do not understand you.

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-01 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:45:00AM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 10/31/2016 3:30 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : [...] > > > > * What benefits do you see for the separate tool approach? > > > > * Can you negate any of these drawbacks? > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-11-01 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Tuesday 2016-11-01 02:45:00 -0300, James Almer encoded: > On 10/31/2016 3:30 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : [...] > > * What benefits do you see for the separate tool approach? > > > > * Can you negate any of these drawbacks? > > I'll

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 3:30 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : >> It's an scenario that could happen, like it or not. I'd rather not open the >> doors for it. > > "Opening doors" sounds like a different wording for the slippery slope > fallacy. Would you

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 07:22:58PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 02:41:05PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > > On 10/31/2016 1:54 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > [...] > > > > > >> Which so happens to be what every

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Josh de Kock a écrit : > I am extremely against the inclusion of this patch as well. It's something > which has really limited use-cases and should be a standalone tool. Duplicate argument. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: Digital

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > It's an scenario that could happen, like it or not. I'd rather not open the > doors for it. "Opening doors" sounds like a different wording for the slippery slope fallacy. > "why this format and not this other" is coincidentally the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 02:41:05PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 10/31/2016 1:54 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : [...] > > > >> Which so happens to be what every libav* user has to do for their projects. > >> Write a program using the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 1:54 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : >> Someone will come up with an hexdump demuxer next and call hexdump output >> a multimedia file, if we follow your views. Or an XML parser for a similarly >> arbitrary custom format they

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > Someone will come up with an hexdump demuxer next and call hexdump output > a multimedia file, if we follow your views. Or an XML parser for a similarly > arbitrary custom format they happened to devise. Or maybe oggz-dump's output. > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > You not liking an argument doesn't mean the argument doesn't exist. Indeed. On the other hand, someone saying they do not intend to give arguments means the argument does not exist. That is exactly the short and long version of wm4's

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 1:36 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : >> So you're saying no matter how many people veto a patch it means shit and >> they will be committed anyway because the writer of the patch and one other >> person want to? >> >> One author, one

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > So you're saying no matter how many people veto a patch it means shit and > they will be committed anyway because the writer of the patch and one other > person want to? > > One author, one positive review and seven billion Nack means the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 1:27 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, wm4 a écrit : >> I don't have the energy for such long-winded technological discussions >> which (predictably) lead to nothing. I just want my disagreement noted. > > Well, you noted it, and I personally do not care

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 11:57 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Jean-Baptiste Kempf: >> ffprobe is not a video/audio format. >> It has no public specification, is made up and completely arbitrary >> format. >> It will not be used by the large majority of applications. > > Indeed. The same goes for a lot of

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, wm4 a écrit : > I don't have the energy for such long-winded technological discussions > which (predictably) lead to nothing. I just want my disagreement noted. Well, you noted it, and I personally do not care at all without arguments. > If we have Reviewed-by

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread wm4
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:20:15 +0100 Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit : > > I strongly disagree with this patch too. > > We do not care about the number of people who disagree, we only care > about practical arguments. > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Jean-Baptiste Kempf: > ffprobe is not a video/audio format. > It has no public specification, is made up and completely arbitrary > format. > It will not be used by the large majority of applications. Indeed. The same goes for a lot of obscure formats used to decode game cutscene data. At least,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Stefano Sabatini a écrit : > So, in practical terms, do you want me to start a formal vote about > the inclusion of the format? NO! Until ten minutes ago, there was no actual arguments against. The technical discussion just started. Regards, -- Nicolas George

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Monday 2016-10-31 11:27:17 -0300, James Almer encoded: > On 10/31/2016 11:20 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit : > >> I strongly disagree with this patch too. > > > > We do not care about the number of people who disagree, we only

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 11:30 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : >> That's a curious thing to say when we have a voting committee to >> deal with polarizing subjects that went beyond practical arguments. > > The voting committee is there for when arguments

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Jean-Baptiste Kempf
Hi, On Mon, 31 Oct 2016, at 07:20, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit : > > I strongly disagree with this patch too. > > If you, or anyone else opposing it, has counter-arguments, please give > them. Otherwise, the patch should go in once it is

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > That's a curious thing to say when we have a voting committee to > deal with polarizing subjects that went beyond practical arguments. The voting committee is there for when arguments are failed: when there are significant pros and cons on

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread James Almer
On 10/31/2016 11:20 AM, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit : >> I strongly disagree with this patch too. > > We do not care about the number of people who disagree, we only care > about practical arguments. That's a curious thing to say when we

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 10 brumaire, an CCXXV, Jean-Baptiste Kempf a écrit : > I strongly disagree with this patch too. We do not care about the number of people who disagree, we only care about practical arguments. IIRC, the last argument on the matter was mine:

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Jean-Baptiste Kempf
Hi, On Mon, 31 Oct 2016, at 07:03, wm4 wrote: > I very strongly disagree with this patch, but consider myself > over-voted. I strongly disagree with this patch too. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread wm4
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:51:10 +0100 Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Thursday 2016-10-27 17:08:50 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > > On date Wednesday 2016-10-26 01:46:35 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:07:34PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-31 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Thursday 2016-10-27 17:08:50 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > On date Wednesday 2016-10-26 01:46:35 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:07:34PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > [...] > > > 267580c51d49daf94e73a33175c63ecfed6a0bed > > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-27 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Wednesday 2016-10-26 01:46:35 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:07:34PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: [...] > > 267580c51d49daf94e73a33175c63ecfed6a0bed > > 0002-lavf-add-ffprobe-demuxer.patch > > From 4e0aac4bc00104483859f9950af2ffb15fea6c12 Mon Sep 17

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-26 Thread wm4
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:46:35 +0200 Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:07:34PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > On date Tuesday 2016-10-18 16:06:47 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:33:27PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-25 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 05:07:34PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Tuesday 2016-10-18 16:06:47 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:33:27PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > On date Thursday 2016-10-13 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > > > > On

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-25 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Tuesday 2016-10-18 16:06:47 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:33:27PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > On date Thursday 2016-10-13 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > > > On date Thursday 2016-09-29 21:55:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > [...] > > > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-25 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Wednesday 2016-10-19 17:37:36 +0200, Moritz Barsnick encoded: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 13:33:27 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > Latest patch in attachment with ffprobe demuxer disabled by default, > > > and extended documentation. (I'm also attaching the ff_get_line2 patch > > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-19 Thread Moritz Barsnick
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 13:33:27 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > Latest patch in attachment with ffprobe demuxer disabled by default, > > and extended documentation. (I'm also attaching the ff_get_line2 patch > > which is used by this new patch). > Updated, depends on the ff_get_line2() patch.

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-18 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:33:27PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Thursday 2016-10-13 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > > On date Thursday 2016-09-29 21:55:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: > [...] > > > This seems like a rather special use case. Why does it have a demuxer, > > > and

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-18 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Thursday 2016-10-13 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > On date Thursday 2016-09-29 21:55:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: [...] > > This seems like a rather special use case. Why does it have a demuxer, > > and can't be in your own C code using libavcodec/libavformat? > > > > > In

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-18 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Thursday 2016-09-29 21:02:14 +0100, Josh de Kock encoded: [...] > Are you sure this cannot be done from outside of libav*? It really > seems like something which wouldn't actually be very useful for > anyone else. It can be done outside of libav* (reading from a custom format, and then

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-18 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Friday 2016-10-14 00:11:49 +0200, Moritz Barsnick encoded: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > +In particular, can be also used to inject data stream generated by > ^ it can > > > +Unrecognized values are discarded (this allows the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-13 Thread Moritz Barsnick
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 19:46:41 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > +In particular, can be also used to inject data stream generated by ^ it can > +Unrecognized values are discarded (this allows the demuxer to accept > +the output generated by @command{ffprobe} without further >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-10-13 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Thursday 2016-09-29 21:55:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 01:21:01 +0200 > Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > On date Monday 2016-09-26 18:55:47 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > > On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:32:37 +0200 > > > Stefano Sabatini wrote: >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-29 Thread Nicolas George
L'octidi 8 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, wm4 a écrit : > This seems like a rather special use case. Why does it have a demuxer, > and can't be in your own C code using libavcodec/libavformat? Of course, it can. It just takes more effort overall. You do not believe that Stefano and I both started working

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-29 Thread Josh de Kock
On 29/09/2016 00:21, Stefano Sabatini wrote: On date Monday 2016-09-26 18:55:47 +0200, wm4 encoded: On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:32:37 +0200 Stefano Sabatini wrote: [...] My use case: I need to build a data stream with scripting/manual editing. Since I don't want to have to

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-29 Thread wm4
On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 01:21:01 +0200 Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Monday 2016-09-26 18:55:47 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:32:37 +0200 > > Stefano Sabatini wrote: > [...] > > > > > My use case: I need to build a data stream with

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-26 Thread wm4
On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:32:37 +0200 Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Saturday 2016-09-24 15:21:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 19:46:16 +0200 > > Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > > > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded:

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-25 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Saturday 2016-09-24 15:21:11 +0200, wm4 encoded: > On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 19:46:16 +0200 > Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 18:50:27 +0200 > > > Stefano Sabatini wrote: >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-24 Thread Carl Eugen Hoyos
2016-09-24 15:21 GMT+02:00 wm4 : > On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:27:00 +0200 > Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > >> 2016-09-23 19:46 GMT+02:00 Stefano Sabatini : >> > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: >> >> at least it shouldn't

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-24 Thread wm4
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:27:00 +0200 Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > 2016-09-23 19:46 GMT+02:00 Stefano Sabatini : > > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: > >> at least it shouldn't be enabled by default. > > > > I understand the security

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-24 Thread wm4
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 19:46:16 +0200 Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 18:50:27 +0200 > > Stefano Sabatini wrote: > [...] > > > Ping. I'd like to commit this if there are no

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-23 Thread Carl Eugen Hoyos
2016-09-23 19:46 GMT+02:00 Stefano Sabatini : > On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: >> at least it shouldn't be enabled by default. > > I understand the security concerns, and I have no objections > against disabling this by default if developers prefer this

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-23 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Friday 2016-09-23 09:34:19 +0200, wm4 encoded: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 18:50:27 +0200 > Stefano Sabatini wrote: [...] > > Ping. I'd like to commit this if there are no objections. Also, > > possibly add a muxer to generate output directly readable by the > > demuxer

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-23 Thread wm4
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 18:50:27 +0200 Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Sunday 2016-09-18 15:28:45 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > > On date Saturday 2016-09-17 18:42:35 +0200, Paul B Mahol encoded: > > > On 9/17/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > > On

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-22 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Sunday 2016-09-18 15:28:45 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: > On date Saturday 2016-09-17 18:42:35 +0200, Paul B Mahol encoded: > > On 9/17/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > > On date Sunday 2016-09-04 23:25:56 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > > >> On Sun, Sep 04,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-18 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Saturday 2016-09-17 18:42:35 +0200, Paul B Mahol encoded: > On 9/17/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > On date Sunday 2016-09-04 23:25:56 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > >> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 06:24:37PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > >> > From: Nicolas George

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-17 Thread Nicolas George
Le jour du Génie, an CCXXIV, Paul B Mahol a écrit : > Why we need this hack? I think I already gave an answer. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-17 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 9/17/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Sunday 2016-09-04 23:25:56 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: >> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 06:24:37PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: >> > From: Nicolas George >> > >> > With several modifications and documentation

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-17 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Sunday 2016-09-04 23:25:56 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded: > On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 06:24:37PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > From: Nicolas George > > > > With several modifications and documentation by Stefano Sabatini > > . > > > >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-05 Thread Nicolas George
Le decadi 20 fructidor, an CCXXIV, Paul B Mahol a écrit : > What is "output" in this context? Imagine you are trying to debug a problem in filters with a particular file. You suspect an issue with timestamps, or with whatever. To check, you may want to change the input file slightly. This is not

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-05 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 9/4/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Sunday 2016-09-04 18:27:55 +0200, Paul B Mahol encoded: >> On 9/4/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: >> > From: Nicolas George >> > >> > With several modifications and documentation by Stefano

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-04 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 06:24:37PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > From: Nicolas George > > With several modifications and documentation by Stefano Sabatini > . > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas George > --- > doc/ffprobe-format.texi | 130

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-04 Thread Stefano Sabatini
On date Sunday 2016-09-04 18:27:55 +0200, Paul B Mahol encoded: > On 9/4/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > > From: Nicolas George > > > > With several modifications and documentation by Stefano Sabatini > > . > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf: add ffprobe demuxer

2016-09-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 9/4/16, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > From: Nicolas George > > With several modifications and documentation by Stefano Sabatini > . > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas George > --- > doc/ffprobe-format.texi | 130