mirror of
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv
synced 2025-02-15 11:37:03 +00:00
c778f10b0a
git-svn-id: svn://svn.mplayerhq.hu/mplayer/trunk@5980 b3059339-0415-0410-9bf9-f77b7e298cf2
142 lines
6.3 KiB
HTML
142 lines
6.3 KiB
HTML
<HTML>
|
|
|
|
<HEAD>
|
|
<STYLE>
|
|
.text
|
|
{font-family : Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
|
|
font-size : 14px;}
|
|
</STYLE>
|
|
</HEAD>
|
|
|
|
<BODY BGCOLOR=white>
|
|
|
|
<FONT CLASS="text">
|
|
|
|
<P><B><I>In medias res</I></B></P>
|
|
|
|
<P>There are two major topic which always causes huge dispute and flame on the
|
|
<A HREF="http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu/cgi-bin/htsearch">mplayer-users</A>
|
|
mailing list. Number one is of course the topic of the</P>
|
|
|
|
<A NAME=gcc><P><B><I>GCC 2.96 series</I></B></P>
|
|
|
|
<P><B>Also read <A HREF="gcc-2.96-3.0.html">this</A> text !!!</B></P>
|
|
|
|
<P>The <I>background</I> : there were/are the GCC <B>2.95</B> series. The
|
|
best of them was 2.95.3 . Please note the style of the version numbering.
|
|
This is how the GCC team numbers their compilers. The 2.95 series are good.
|
|
We never ever saw anything that was miscompiled because of the 2.95.3's faultiness.</P>
|
|
|
|
<P>The <I>action</I> : <B>RedHat</B> started to include a GCC version of <B>2.96</B>
|
|
with their distributions. Note the version numbering. This should be the GCC
|
|
team's versioning. They patched the CVS version of GCC (something between 2.95 and 3.0)
|
|
They patched it very deep, and used this version in the distrib because 3.0
|
|
wasn't out at time, and they wanted IA64 support ASAP (business reasons).
|
|
Oh, and GCC 2.95 miscompiles bash on the s390 architecture...</P>
|
|
|
|
<P>The <I>facts</I> : <B>MPlayer</B>'s compile process needs the
|
|
<CODE>--disable-gcc-checking</CODE> to proceed upon detecting a GCC version of
|
|
2.96 (apparently it needs this option on <B>egcs</B> too. It's because we don't
|
|
test <B>MPlayer</B> on egcs. Pardon us, but we rather develop <B>MPlayer</B>).
|
|
If you know <B>MPlayer</B>, you should know that it has great speed. It
|
|
achieves this by having overoptimized MMX/SSE/3DNow/etc codes, fastmemcpy, and
|
|
lots of other features. <B>MPlayer</B> contained MMX/3DNow instructions in a
|
|
syntax that all Linux compilers accept it... except RedHat's GCC (it's more
|
|
standard compliant). It simply <B><I>skips</I></B> them. It doesn't give
|
|
errors. It doesn't give warnings. <B>And</B>, there is Lame. With gcc 2.96, its quality check
|
|
(<CODE>make test</CODE> after compiling) <I>doesn't even run !!!</I>
|
|
But hey, it compiles bash on s390 and IA64.</P>
|
|
|
|
<P>The <I>statements</I> : most developers around the world begun having
|
|
bad feelings about RedHat's GCC 2.96 , and told their RedHat users to
|
|
compile with other compiler than 2.96 . RedHat users' disappointment slowly
|
|
went into anger. What was all good
|
|
for, apart from giving headaches to developers, putting oil on anti-RedHat
|
|
flame, confusing users? The answer, I do not know.</P>
|
|
|
|
<P><I>Present age, present time</I> : RedHat says that GCC 2.96-85 and above
|
|
is fixed, and works properly. Note the versioning. They should have started
|
|
with something like this. What about GCC 2.96.85 ? It doesn't matter now.
|
|
I don't search, but I still see bugs with 2.96 . It doesn't matter now,
|
|
hopefully now <B>RedHat will forget about 2.96</B> and turn towards <B>3.0</B>.
|
|
Towards a deep patched 3.0...
|
|
</P>
|
|
|
|
<P><I>What I don't understand</I> is why are we hated by RedHat users for
|
|
putting warning messages, and stay-away documents in <B>MPlayer</B> .
|
|
Why are we called "brain damaged", "total asshole", "childish" by
|
|
<B>RedHat users</B>, on our mailing list, and even on the <B>redhat-devel</B> .
|
|
They even considered forking <B>MPlayer</B> for themselves. RedHat users.
|
|
Why? It's RedHat that made the compiler, why do <U>you</U> have to hate us?
|
|
Are you <U>that</U> fellow RedHat worshippers? Please stop it. We don't hold
|
|
a grudge against users, doesn't matter how loud you advertise its contrary.
|
|
Please go flame Linus Torvalds, the DRI developers (oh, now I know why
|
|
there were laid off by VA!), the Wine, avifile. Even if we are arrogant,
|
|
are we not the same as the previously listed ones? Why do <B>we</B> have
|
|
to suffer from your unrightful wrath?</P>
|
|
|
|
<P><A HREF="mailto:willis_matthew@yahoo.com">Matt Willis</A> kindly submitted
|
|
a simple GCC-3.0.3 compiling howto, I'm copying it here:</P>
|
|
|
|
<P>
|
|
<UL>
|
|
<LI>Download gcc. Go to the <A
|
|
HREF="http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html">http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html</A>
|
|
page.
|
|
I downloaded the following, but you don't need everything:<BR>
|
|
<CODE>gcc-g++-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-objc-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-g77-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-testsuite-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-core-3.0.3.tar.gz<BR>
|
|
gcc-java-3.0.3.tar.gz</CODE>
|
|
</LI>
|
|
|
|
<LI>Unpack the files, make a build directory, and build<CODE><PRE>
|
|
tar xvzf gcc-*3.0.3.tar.gz
|
|
mkdir gcc-build; cd gcc-build
|
|
../gcc-3.0.3/configure --prefix=/opt --program-suffix=-3.0.3
|
|
make bootstrap; mkdir -p /opt; make install</PRE></CODE>
|
|
|
|
<LI>Set your path to include /opt/bin<BR>
|
|
<CODE>export PATH=/opt/bin:${PATH}</CODE>
|
|
|
|
<LI>Now you can build MPlayer.</LI>
|
|
</UL>
|
|
</P>
|
|
|
|
<A NAME=nvidia><P><B><I>NVidia</I></B></P>
|
|
|
|
<P>We don't like nvidia's binary drives, their quality, unstability,
|
|
non-existant user support, always appearing new bugs. And most users behave
|
|
the same. We've been contacted by NVidia lately, and they said these bugs
|
|
don't exist, unstability is caused by bad AGP chips, and they received
|
|
no reports of driver bugs (the purple line, for example). So: if you have
|
|
problem with your NVidia, update the nvidia driver and/or buy a new
|
|
motherboard.</P>
|
|
|
|
<A NAME=kotsog><P><B><I>Joe Barr</I></B></P>
|
|
|
|
<P>He doesn't reply to our mails. His editor doesn't reply to our mails.
|
|
The net is full with his false statements and accusitions (he apparently
|
|
doesn't like for example the BSD guys, because of their different viewpoints
|
|
[about what?]).</P>
|
|
|
|
<P>Now some quotes from different people about Joe Barr (just for you
|
|
understand why doesn't he matter at all):</P>
|
|
|
|
<P><I>"You may all remember the LinuxWorld 2000, when he claimed that Linus T said
|
|
that 'FreeBSD is just a handful of programmers'. Linus said NOTHING of the
|
|
sort. When Joe was called on this, his reaction was to call BSD supporters
|
|
assholes and jerks."</I></P>
|
|
|
|
<P><I>"He's interesting, but not good at avoiding, um... controversy. Joe Barr
|
|
used to be one of the regulars on Will Zachmann's Canopus forum on Compuserve,
|
|
years ago. He was an OS/2 advocate then (I was an OS/2 fan too).
|
|
He used to go over-the-top, flaming people, and I suspect he had some hard
|
|
times, then. He's mellowed some, judging by his columns recently. Moderately
|
|
subtle humor was not his mode in those earlier days, not at all."</I></P>
|
|
|
|
</HTML>
|