[MPlayer-users] Unknown suboption lavf

[Guillaume POIRIER]

Hi,

On 2/15/06, David Liontooth <liontooth at cogweb.net> wrote:
> Guillaume POIRIER wrote:
> >The thing is that lavf was not working too well at that time anyhow,
> >and it's  very possible that most packagers didn't build MPlayer with
> >lavf.
> >
> >Well, it is a big problem here :)

> Wait -- what is a problem? That lavf was not working that well before
> obviously isn't a problem anymore. Do you mean it's a problem that it's
> still not working well, or just that most packagers still don't build
> MPlayer with lavf?

I haven't used lavf enough to say much about that. All I know is that
MEncoder has been build to support AVI only at first, so all other
containers are supported thanks much coding magic. So yes, lavc may or
may not work too well depending on your needs.

For instance, when I used it in August, I found that lavf's MPEG muxer
was working a lot better for my needs than MEncoder... On the
contrary, ppl reported that MP4 muxer was really not working well.


> Are there downsides to building MPlayer with the libavcodec, libavformat
> and libavutil libraries from FFmpeg?

Not that I know of.


> Any reason not to do it?

Having slimmer binaries? :)


> Or do you
> recommend everyone, including packagers, include these libraries?

Yes, I'd recommend everyone to include it, especially since to the
best of my knowledge, most developers are for expanding lavf as much
as possible to eventually ditch all MPlayer's specific code that lavf
implements.

Guilaume
--
Just because code is syntactically "valid" GNU C doesn't mean gcc can
always compile it.
  Steven Bosscher - 2005-01-01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11203#c14
---
MPlayer's doc isn't up-to-date. Visit my updated mirror here:
http://tuxrip.free.fr//MPlayer-DOCS-HTML/en/
http://tuxrip.free.fr//MPlayer-DOCS-HTML/fr/