[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] windows: Remove the VS_FFI_FILEFLAGSMASK setting

[James Almer]

On 1/5/2022 9:29 AM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 1:21 PM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote:
>>
>> According to the documentation, the VS_FFI_FILEFLAGSMASK mask
>> consists of all the following flags set:
>> VS_FF_DEBUG, VS_FF_PATCHED, VS_FF_PRERELEASE, VS_FF_PRIVATEBUILD,
>> VS_FF_SPECIALBUILD.
>>
>> The documentation of these fields say e.g. this:
>> VS_FF_PATCHED      File has been modified and is not identical to the
>>                     original shipping file of the same version number.
>> VS_FF_PRIVATEBUILD File was not built using standard release procedures.
>>                     If this value is given, the StringFileInfo block must
>>                     contain a PrivateBuild string.
>>
>> It doesn't seem like it's intentional to set all of these flags
>> (and setting all of them at once doesn't seem like something one
>> ever would want to do anyway).
>>
> 
> FILEFLAGSMASK  sets the flags that are valid, not the flags that are
> actually set - FILEFLAGS would do that.
> So what we are actually doing is telling it all flags are valid, and
> none are set (since FILEFLAGS is not set at all).

fwiw, flagging VS_FF_DEBUG sounds like it would be nice if debug symbols 
are compiled in (the default behavior), but configure doesn't seem to 
signal it in config.mak outside of defining certain cflags and such, so 
as is it's not possible.

> 
> As far as I can tell, not specifying FILEFLAGSMASK is identical to
> specifying it with VS_FFI_FILEFLAGSMASK, so either applying or not
> should yield identical information in the binaries.
> 
> - Hendrik
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> 
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".