Hi, On 08.11.2015 23:13, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > On 08 Nov, Sebastian Ramacher wrote : >> Thanks for the patch. But this is already fixed for 3.0 and I'd rather take >> the >> upstream fix to keep the diff minimal. The relevant commits seem to be: >> >> 5707f03f17980d294cda103892d80d76458dae05 >> 5f91febe28de339a41b450054f9e6d240d23a8a8 >> cdf35ce011abed346d898da1dcd0bae6bebd14ef
This commit looks quite odd. I don't think it does anything useful. >> faa7bd357b1f9e07a6ffbc451a188773fad7a275 >> 7db8b37716c044f93547d733d7f1bb313ed5226b >> 3d2850fe728424b3318e00c7be13ddba1cb3c544 >> dbad0d2747e76067808a227d113d747a87a70169 >> d185cfaad5353822849723a31ac25d65d8d23d00 >> 85b5b4e05f944ad98859ab3fb1c0ddf36ac887bc >> >> J-B, are these all the necessary commits? Could they be applied to 2.2 >> branch? The master branch still uses the deprecated FF_MAX_B_FRAMES. (That's not going to vanish with FFmpeg 2.9, though.) > No, there are more of those, IIRC, and some are runtime issues and it's > difficult > to plug correctly those in 2.2 branch. Can you expand on what runtime issues you mean? These might also be relevant for other packages. > So, if you want a recent ffmpeg with VLC, you need 3.0. Is there an estimated release date for VLC 3.0? Best regards, Andreas
