> A newbie question - how would cross-compiling for a target of Win10x64 work,
> in say ubuntu still eg per zeranoe's method, or rdp's at
> https://github.com/rdp/ffmpeg-windows-build-helpers ?
meson has excellent support for cross compilation, you can find more info on
this at
On 07/06/2018 12:46 PM, Tobias Rapp wrote:
>
> What are the dependencies besides Meson and Python v3 itself?
Meson has no hard dependency apart from python3, if the default backend (ninja)
is used, then ninja must indeed also be present on the system.
> Is using Ninja mandatory for building or
> -Original Message-
> From: ffmpeg-devel On Behalf Of Tobias Rapp
> Sent: Friday, July 6, 2018 8:16 PM
> To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] New build system
>
> On 04.07.2018 16:36, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote:
> > [...]
>
On 04.07.2018 16:36, Mathieu Duponchelle wrote:
[...]
If there are any other questions related to meson or the FFmpeg meson port
please feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer them.
What are the dependencies besides Meson and Python v3 itself? Is using
Ninja mandatory for building or
On 07/04/2018 07:01 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> I don't understand: If everything is enabled and there are
> no options to disable features, how did you (and other
> people in favour of this change) measure performance?
Everything is automatically enabled indeed, but most of the system checks
2018-06-14 18:03 GMT+02:00, Josh de Kock :
> - Exposing options, for now everything is automatically enabled
I don't understand: If everything is enabled and there are
no options to disable features, how did you (and other
people in favour of this change) measure performance?
Carl Eugen
Hey $list, not an FFmpeg developer, but I worked on the meson port and figured
I could address some of the points that were made.
Since the initial post I have also added support for compiling with Msys/MingW
on Window now in addition to MSVC.
## Performance comparison
A significant part of the
On 6/18/2018 10:36 AM, Tomas Härdin wrote:
I'm in favor of something changing, because the current slowness is
simply not acceptable. Messing around when adding a new codec or format
and having to wait *seven minutes* between attempts when something is
wrong is a serious motivation killer..
On 6/18/2018 3:44 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:19 PM Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 06:52:18PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
>>> Tomas Härdin (2018-06-18):
Others have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating: the build
(make)
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:19 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 06:52:18PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Tomas Härdin (2018-06-18):
> > > Others have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating: the build
> > > (make) isn't what's so slow, configure is. I went ahead
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 06:52:18PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Tomas Härdin (2018-06-18):
> > Others have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating: the build
> > (make) isn't what's so slow, configure is. I went ahead and did some
> > profiling on it based on the StackOverflow thread that
Tomas Härdin (2018-06-18):
> Others have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating: the build
> (make) isn't what's so slow, configure is. I went ahead and did some
> profiling on it based on the StackOverflow thread that pops up when one
> Web-searches "bash profiling" [1]. I went with what
tor 2018-06-14 klockan 17:03 +0100 skrev Josh de Kock:
> Any comments, and thoughts on a new build system would be much
> appreciated including concerns regarding it.
Others have mentioned this already, but it bears repeating: the build
(make) isn't what's so slow, configure is. I went ahead and
2018-06-15 2:16 GMT+02:00, Martin Herkt :
> FFmpeg’s build system is unique because despite its lack
> of caching, one must sometimes make clean and
> reconfigure everything when bisecting for bugs.
Yes, this is unavoidable (make cannot know about new
features without running configure).
>
On Friday, June 15, 2018 12:45:53 AM CEST Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, at 18:03, Josh de Kock wrote:
> > As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg,
> > namely Meson[1]. There has already been a fair amount of work (not by
>
> I think this
2018-06-14 23:50 GMT+02:00, Rostislav Pehlivanov :
> On 14 June 2018 at 19:56, Nicolas George wrote:
>
>> Josh de Kock (2018-06-14):
>> > As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg,
>> namely
>> > Meson[1].
>>
>> I am very strongly against this.
>>
>> I loathe make and all
Hello,
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, at 18:03, Josh de Kock wrote:
> As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg,
> namely Meson[1]. There has already been a fair amount of work (not by
I think this is a great idea.
Custom buildsystem are almost always wrong and/or broken.
On 6/15/18, James Almer wrote:
> On 6/14/2018 7:10 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> On 6/14/18, Nicolas George wrote:
>>> Rostislav Pehlivanov (2018-06-14):
No, it isn't. Maybe if you took a moment to look at the proposed
branches
you'd notice NONE Of them remove ./configure. In fact
On 6/14/2018 7:10 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On 6/14/18, Nicolas George wrote:
>> Rostislav Pehlivanov (2018-06-14):
>>> No, it isn't. Maybe if you took a moment to look at the proposed branches
>>> you'd notice NONE Of them remove ./configure. In fact that's precisely
>>> the
>>> plan - to leave
On 6/14/18, Nicolas George wrote:
> Rostislav Pehlivanov (2018-06-14):
>> No, it isn't. Maybe if you took a moment to look at the proposed branches
>> you'd notice NONE Of them remove ./configure. In fact that's precisely
>> the
>> plan - to leave and still support the script for the forseeable
Rostislav Pehlivanov (2018-06-14):
> No, it isn't. Maybe if you took a moment to look at the proposed branches
> you'd notice NONE Of them remove ./configure. In fact that's precisely the
> plan - to leave and still support the script for the forseeable future.
> Hence your predjudice is
On 14 June 2018 at 19:56, Nicolas George wrote:
> Josh de Kock (2018-06-14):
> > As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg,
> namely
> > Meson[1].
>
> I am very strongly against this.
>
> I loathe make and all it has to do with it, but really, for a project
> like this,
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 9:05 PM Nicolas George wrote:
>
> Hendrik Leppkes (2018-06-14):
> > I don't mind make itself, for me its configure thats the real problem.
> > Its extremely slow (we're talking minutes), for me often taking longer
> > then the actual compilation (especially with ccache) -
Hendrik Leppkes (2018-06-14):
> I don't mind make itself, for me its configure thats the real problem.
> Its extremely slow (we're talking minutes), for me often taking longer
> then the actual compilation (especially with ccache) - and that is
> really extremely painful.
IIRC, a change from the
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:56 PM Nicolas George wrote:
>
> Josh de Kock (2018-06-14):
> > As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg, namely
> > Meson[1].
>
> I am very strongly against this.
>
> I loathe make and all it has to do with it, but really, for a project
> like
Josh de Kock (2018-06-14):
> As such, I'd like to propose adopting a new build system to FFmpeg, namely
> Meson[1].
I am very strongly against this.
I loathe make and all it has to do with it, but really, for a project
like this, it is the only viable option. The principles of make are
already
26 matches
Mail list logo
