[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2] avfilter: use av_fopen_utf8() instead of plain fopen()

[Soft Works]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2022 10:12 PM
> To: softworkz <ffmpegagent at gmail.com>
> Cc: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org; Soft Works <softworkz at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] avfilter: use av_fopen_utf8() instead of plain
> fopen()
> 
> On Mon, 9 May 2022, softworkz wrote:
> 
> > From: softworkz <softworkz at hotmail.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: softworkz <softworkz at hotmail.com>
> > ---
> >    use av_fopen_utf8() instead of plain fopen()
> >
> >    Unify file access operations by replacing usages of direct calls
> to
> >    posix fopen()
> >
> >    v2: Remove changes to fftools for now
> >
> > Published-As: https://github.com/ffstaging/FFmpeg/releases/tag/pr-
> ffstaging-26%2Fsoftworkz%2Fsubmit_replace_fopen-v2
> > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/ffstaging/FFmpeg pr-
> ffstaging-26/softworkz/submit_replace_fopen-v2
> > Pull-Request: https://github.com/ffstaging/FFmpeg/pull/26
> >
> > Range-diff vs v1:
> >
> > 1:  5802c8526c < -:  ---------- fftools: use av_fopen_utf8() instead
> of plain fopen()
> > 2:  3266640a93 = 1:  e47287be64 avfilter: use av_fopen_utf8()
> instead of plain fopen()
> >
> >
> > libavfilter/af_firequalizer.c | 2 +-
> > libavfilter/vf_deshake.c      | 2 +-
> > libavfilter/vf_signature.c    | 4 ++--
> > libavfilter/vf_ssim.c         | 2 +-
> > libavfilter/vf_vmafmotion.c   | 2 +-
> > 5 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> LGTM I think. For fully fixing the situation about this function, I
> believe we're going to need to rename it (as the proper solution won't
> be
> a public function), but as there's already some uses, it's probably
> fine
> to first take it into use consistently, and then rename all the
> occurrances later.

Makes sense. Thanks for reviewing.

> But we should probably add a copy of file_open.o in libavfilter too
> (as
> you noted). This is indeed a preexisting problem, but the issue will
> become more visible if we use it in more places.

Would you able to submit a patch for this or shall I?
(I'd prefer the former ;-)

Thanks,
softworkz