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

["Martin Storsjö" <martin@martin.st>]

On Mon, 9 May 2022, softworkz wrote:

> From: softworkz <softworkz@hotmail.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: softworkz <softworkz@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.

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.

// Martin

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".