when the tools link the static library they also need to link the AVIF_CODEC_LIBARIES about libavif

[joedrago]

Unless I'm mistaken, the v1.0.0 branch of libaom is actually quite old (June 2018), and tons of bugfixes and improvements have been made since then. I had a lot of swirl in a previous GitHub issue concerning that old branch.

If you're building against libaom, I recommend trying a newer SHA (I keep track of the one I build/test against in aom.cmd).

I'll try to fix the linking for apps tonight.

[darix]

Well we ship the package in the distro already. It would be nice if libaom could just do a release :)

git describe --tags
v1.0.0-2683-g0104bddde

yikes ... 2683 commits and no release since?!

[joedrago]

I agree that it seems like a while since an official tag (I'm not a member of the libaom team). I'm not sure what their versioning strategy is, but I do know that the functionality of v1.0.0 isn't sufficient for all of the various combinations libavif offers.

Various context for why v1.0.0 isn't really an interesting release for libavif:

#9
joedrago/avif#9

[joedrago]

Alright, I think I've pinned down the link issues, and discovered some weird CMake flow that I think is cleaned up now. If this now builds the way you expect, I'll probably bump the version tomorrow.

[darix]

is this github org run by the same organisation that also maintains libaom upstream?
where is their bugtracker to report issues against libaom and ask for a release?

[darix]

for the record: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/aomedia/issues/detail?id=2544