Updating F-20 to ffmpeg-2.2.10

[Julian Sikorski]

W dniu 05.11.2014 o 03:55, Sérgio Basto pisze:
> On Dom, 2014-11-02 at 08:02 +0100, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>> W dniu 15.10.2014 o 07:42, Julian Sikorski pisze:
>>> W dniu 15.10.2014 o 00:38, Sérgio Basto pisze:
>>>> Hi, 
>>>>
>>>> On Ter, 2014-10-07 at 08:02 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>>>>>>
>>>>> Please be advised that 2.3 was recently removed from the maintained
>>>>> branches list:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2014-September/162904.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, if we ever rebase F-20, we should use 2.2 and not 2.3.
>>>>
>>>> The mode I like to work and to coordinate the mass rebuild for a stable
>>>> branch (F-20), is first be test in devel . We have packages in devel, we
>>>> test it for some time and when we can say that are stable , so we could
>>>> *copy* to F-20 , another point was: mass rebuild was for ffmpeg/x264 ,
>>>> not only ffmpeg .
>>>> So it is important have .specs for packages that compile in all Fedora
>>>> releases. Having 2 trees, one for F20, other for devel , is just
>>>> justified when is a very core package like udev or systemd  ... , but
>>>> for rpmfusion the point is other, maintainers are not aware ... 
>>>> So *theoretically* my solution was build ffmpeg 2.2 in devel, test it
>>>> and copy to F-20 , but devel already have 2.3 so is not practical . 
>>>>
>>>> Moving forward, just update "ffmpeg" on F20 seems to me acceptable ,
>>>> like you wrote "only libavfilter has a soname bump (snip) This means
>>>> that we really only need to rebuild dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc." but we
>>>> miss the test phase, we need guarantee that ffmpeg version was tested ,
>>>> any suggestion ?
>>>
>>> ffmpeg-2.2 was in devel between March and August. Moreover, the reason
>>> why upstream picked it over 2.3 was that it is used by more downstream
>>> distros: OpenSUSE, SUSE Enterprise and ROSA [1]. If we let it sit in
>>> -testing for a bit longer than usual, I believe this will be enough.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Saying that and giving up mass rebuild ffmpeg/x264 for F-20, no need
>>>> preserve devel as is and we can do the mass rebuild for ffmpeg 2.4 on
>>>> devel , anything pending ?
>>>
>>> I don't think anything has changed since last time: dvbcut and
>>> kmediafactory fail to rebuild, vlc needs a patch, everything else builds
>>> fine. David Timms was working on making dvbcut work, but I have not
>>> heard from him regarding whether he was successful.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> BTW what packages (.spec) do you have ? that are different from stable
>>>> branches to devel ?
>>>
>>> Only ffmpeg and mplayer. ffmpeg due to its numerous dependencies, and
>>> mplayer because it is highly dependent on ffmpeg.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> [1] https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Downstreams
>>>
>> Where do we stand on this?
> 
> I don't change must what I wrote :
> "Update ffmpeg on F20 seems to me acceptable ,like you wrote "only
> libavfilter has a soname bump ... This means that we really only need to
> rebuild dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc."
> 
> I think you should decide and we need authorization from kwizart . 
> 
> you don't want rebuild others deps right ?  
> 
> 
> cheers 
> 
I think we should go do it. 2.1 has not seen a release in months which
means there might be unfixed security issues in it.
I would only rebuild what we need to (dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc).

Best regards,
Julian