On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Michael Hanke wrote:
Hi!
In utils/cpu_accel.c you should see the function bufalloc() which
is where the malloc error is coming from. The only thing I can
think of to try is add a fprintf(stderr, size = %d\n, size);
I did it. The request size is
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Malloc failed, Was: Re: [Mjpeg-users] MPEG2 encoding performance
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:32:35 +0100
From: Michael Hanke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steven M. Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 23.59, you wrote:
Hi -
What
On Thursday 13 November 2003 08.23, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Michael Hanke wrote:
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 23.30, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
cvs update is your friend grin
Mmmh... That's what I tried to do. But autoconf/automake (invoked by
autogen) failed with
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 09:14, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
If you do that (and it has almost always improved the compression for
me - sometimes quite substantially) then you may encounter playback
difficulties with Ogle - seems they don't handle the dual prime
motion
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 06:14, Andrew Stevens wrote:
-f 8 -E -10 -q 6 -R 0 -I 0 -K tmpgenc
Hmmm... I'm using 1.6.1.90 and i cannot find some options (-E, -10, -R)
in the man page nor in the --help output.
Are you using a recent CVS or something?
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 06:14, Andrew Stevens wrote:
-f 8 -E -10 -q 6 -R 0 -I 0 -K tmpgenc
Hmmm... I'm using 1.6.1.90 and i cannot find some options (-E, -10, -R)
in the man page nor in the --help output.
Are you using a recent CVS or something?
Hi!
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 17:10, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
Main feature that 1.6.1.90 brought to the party was the -K option
and libquicktime (instead of the old/incompatible quicktime4linux)
support. Since then quite a few improvements have been made.
Yes, lots of new
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Alexei Dets wrote:
Yes, lots of new features...
And a couple bugs ;)
Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon? Current CVS mjpegtools
Not at the moment, there are a couple issues (boundary cases that
most folks would not notice) that
Hi,
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 22:53, Alexei Dets wrote:
Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon? Current CVS mjpegtools
are FAR better than 1.6.1 but it is impossible to get it in the packaged form
- all distributions are packaging the latest release... :-(((
Wink noted again. I
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Ronald Bultje wrote:
If people think that yuvdenoise and mpeg2enc are more than ready for a
stable release, I'll package a 1.6.1.91... Else, I'll wait a few days
longer. ;).
yuvdenoise was a problem this past weekend on OS/X - but it is
working now after
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 13:53, Alexei Dets wrote:
Can we expect a stable _release_ version anytime soon?
Or at least a 1.6.1.91 type of thing... ;-) When CVS seems healthy
enough for a partial release.
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 13:07, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
On 11 Nov 2003, Florin Andrei wrote:
So, essentially you're saying that MPEG2 without B-frames is perfectly
legal from the DVD standards p.o.v., right?
They are, and always have been, optional. Nothing says that B
frames
If people think that yuvdenoise and mpeg2enc are more than ready for a
stable release, I'll package a 1.6.1.91... Else, I'll wait a few days
longer. ;).
Ronald
There was a problem reported a while back with post-1.6.1 yuvdenoise
(that is, after my 4:1:1 patches) producing some visual
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Andrew Stevens wrote:
Well... its got a little way to go before its professional quality...
It's getting closer every week/month though ;)
So, to compare like with like you have to compare default mpeg2enc and MPEG-4
encoder encoding full CCITT 720xY pictures
Hi Steven,
aside
Lying around useless with the 'flu today but I have spent the time learning
more about PIC code and shared libs Basically, I think if all the relevant
libs are compiled for shared library usage we should be in business. I've
modified the nasm sources so all the assmbler
Hi everybody,
This is not the first mail about MPEG2 encoding performance, and probably not
the last one either.
I'm comparing here the encoding performances of ffmpeg (MPEG4) and mpeg2enc.
On a PIII-800, the former encodes in real time while the later encodes at
around 3fps.
I might be
16 matches
Mail list logo
