RPM Fusion (Fedora - free) Package Build Report 2011-04-28

[Kevin Kofler]

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> This ffmpeg update likely is ABI-incompatible with the previous releases,
> if I interpret Fedora bz #700702 correctly. I'm in a hurry, so I haven't
> examined it further:
> 
> audacious: relocation error: /usr/lib/audacious/Input/ffaudio.so: symbol
> av_register_protocol2, version LIBAVFORMAT_52 not defined in file
> libavformat.so.52 with link time reference

So I found this reference about the function being removed from libav:
http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/libav-commits/2011-April/000289.html

Some discussion here, under "Avio cleanup II":
http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/libav-devel/2011-April/thread.html

There are some followups which probably make the code look even different.

I see that ffmpeg-0.6.3 from ffmpeg.org also doesn't have 
av_register_protocol2, I guess the patch series or some variant of it was 
applied there too. (And the #if FF_API_OLD_AVIO isn't there, so working 
around the breakage is not as simple as that, unfortunately.) I can't check 
the history because I can't find the git.ffmpeg.org tree, even ffmpeg.org 
points to git.videolan.org which is actually libav!? git.ffmpeg.org shows me 
only the front page. (Might this be related to MPlayer git being down as per 
http://mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html ? Or is this an effect of the fork?)

I also looked at libav-0.6.2 from libav.org (They don't seem to have a 0.6.3 
with the security fixes yet. Their 0.6.2 is from March, so it doesn't have 
them.) and the code there looks the same as in ffmpeg-0.6.3, 
av_register_protocol2 removed completely.

Why they made that kind of incompatible changes in a stable branch (and 
without a soname bump at that), I don't know!


BTW, which of the forks are we going to ship moving on from now? FFmpeg or 
Videolan Libav? Is it too early to tell?

        Kevin Kofler