 |
|
| Yeapp, 2 diff. things. |
|
|
By KultiVator - Posted on May 17, 2004 - 04:40:00 (#12468)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.96 |
|
|
PPro and PMMX chips are two different technologies. Only P2 and newer include both.
|
|
| MMX enhanced -> Pentium Pro? |
|
|
By michael_s - Posted on January 12, 2004 - 02:14:00 (#10493)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.95 |
|
|
MMX absent in Pentium Pro!
|
|
| Re: Leak Checking |
|
|
By Rene Gollent - Posted on May 22, 2003 - 10:08:29 (#7380)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
Yes and no. I double-checked, and -fcheck is required for MALLOC_DEBUG=15 to function properly; lower values do not need the flag, nor does leak check as you pointed out. Sorry for the confusion.
|
|
| Re: Leak checking |
|
|
By marcone - Posted on May 21, 2003 - 21:40:04 (#7374)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
AFAIK, no, -fcheck-memory-usage is not needed. That flag merely instructs the compiler to insert code to verify each and every memory access. This is completely separate from MALLOC_DEBUG and MALLOC_LEAK_CHECK.
|
|
| Re: Leak checking |
|
|
By Rene Gollent - Posted on May 21, 2003 - 10:50:13 (#7371)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
Wouldn't the -fcheck-memory-usage compiler flag have to have been used for it to work? Normally apps just crash on me in odd ways if I try to use either MALLOC_DEBUG or MALLOC_LEAK_CHECK without that build flag.
|
|
| Re: leak-checker bugs - port or LAME? |
|
|
By marcone - Posted on May 21, 2003 - 00:26:25 (#7367)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
I don't know. It could even be a bug in the leak-checking code itself. All I know is that when I "export MALLOC_LEAK_CHECK=1" and then run lame, it crashes (in the leak-checking code, but that doesn't necessarily mean that that's where the bug is).
|
|
| leak-checker bugs - port or LAME? |
|
|
By shatty - Posted on May 20, 2003 - 22:08:35 (#7366)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
Hi marcone,
Do you know if the leak-checker bugs are a port
problem or a LAME problem? A cursory examination of
the LAME website and a google search didn't show up
anything of interest. I'm sorry but I don't have the
time to do a compile on another platform at the
moment, especially since I don't know how the problem
manifests either. :-)
Andrew
|
|
| lame and leak-checking |
|
|
By marcone - Posted on May 19, 2003 - 00:33:07 (#7352)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
This version of lame (both MMX and non-MMX) does not work when leak-checking is enabled (it crashes). 3.90 also had this problem, but 3.88 beta 1 did not.
|
|
| build configurations |
|
|
By shatty - Posted on January 23, 2003 - 02:51:07 (#5523)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
Hi, it's somewhat funny since I posted that before I became the new "owner" of LAME on bebits. Anyway, the compatability build was done with the geekgadgets 2000 build of gcc, using --prefix=/boot/home/config, and no other options. The mmx build was done with the 2.95.3 compiler from bebits (otherwise known as the "broken" compiler), and the most recent nasm from bebits. It used the build options --enable-nasm and --build=i686-pc-beos.
|
|
| Nice work |
|
|
By tqh - Posted on January 22, 2003 - 15:55:36 (#5518)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
I'm also interested in your build configuration (incl. CFLAGS)
|
|
| Thanks, these are very good packages! |
|
|
By Pete - Posted on January 22, 2003 - 12:13:46 (#5514)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.93.1 |
|
|
Just want to say thanks for your work, these are very good packages. I like the install options. Also good to hear that you commited the BeOS source changes to the main CVS tree. Thanks again!
|
|
| more compile details pls and shared library |
|
|
By shatty - Posted on June 17, 2002 - 03:59:40 (#1848)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.92 |
|
|
Hi,
I was working on a project and I needed the lame shared library. I noticed that it's not in this build. Also I was wondering did you do the build with nasm/mmx optimizations? Which makefile did you use? I made this build myself as well although I built the shared library as well. (it seemed I had to use Makefile.unix to do that) I've sent an email to the lame email address about my build issues.
shatty
|
|
| Thanks, to compile Lame on BeOS.... |
|
|
By cvincent - Posted on March 27, 2002 - 08:30:12 (#691)
Current version when comment was posted: 3.91 |
|
|
Very great, a lot of thanks to make the port of lame encoder.
CKJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Recent Downloads - # 270
Total Downloads - # 156
Total Views - # 184
User Ratings - # 206
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
Audio Utilities
MP3 Encoders
MP3 Tools
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1. BePodder - 9.80
2. QEMU - 9.68
3. ScummVM - 9.57
4. cpu_fix - 9.42
5. Jukebox - 9.40
6. libdl.so - 9.40
7. Haiku AGP busm... - 9.35
8. vim6 - 9.31
9. Beezer - 9.26
10. HandBrake - 9.25
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1. BeOS 5 Perso... - 13,643
2. Realtek RTL8... - 13,137
3. Ati Radeon G... - 12,632
4. Ensoniq Audio... - 7,592
5. ATI Rage 128... - 7,462
6. USB Joystick... - 5,677
7. Broadcom 440x... - 5,426
8. S3 Trio 64 v2... - 4,746
9. USB Serial dr... - 4,719
10. Intel Extreme... - 4,482
|
|
|
|
 |
| You are not logged in.
Login
|
|
|
|
 |
|
