ffmpeg-2.4 released

[Julian Sikorski]

W dniu 02.10.2014 o 01:46, Sérgio Basto pisze:
> On Qua, 2014-10-01 at 19:38 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>> W dniu 25.09.2014 o 20:51, Sérgio Basto pisze:
>>> On Qui, 2014-09-25 at 19:27 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>>>> W dniu 25.09.2014 o 17:26, Sérgio Basto pisze:
>>>>> On Qui, 2014-09-25 at 07:47 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>>>>>> W dniu 21.09.2014 o 23:20, Sérgio Basto pisze:
>>>>>>> On Dom, 2014-09-21 at 19:03 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ffmpeg-2.4 was released recently which means we have another rebuild
>>>>>>>> coming up. I have done a test and only 4 packages have failed, which is
>>>>>>>> not bad given the extent of API changes:
>>>>>>>> - alsa-plugins-freeworld: pcm_a52.c:101:45: error: 'struct a52_ctx' has
>>>>>>>> no member named 'frame'
>>>>>>>> - dvbcut: lavfmuxer.cpp:63:57: error: 'av_new_stream' was not declared
>>>>>>>> in this scope
>>>>>>>> - kmediafactory: videofile.cpp:74:45: error: 'av_find_stream_info' was
>>>>>>>> not declared in this scope (mencoder needs to be rebuilt first)
>>>>>>>>  - vlc: configure: error: libavcodec versions 56 and later are not
>>>>>>>> supported yet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Given that we are close to branching (?), what would be the good time to
>>>>>>>> do the rebuild?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes, I don't see any problem, I can do the mass rebuild of others
>>>>>>> packages, no problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My question if we ever put this updates on F20 ? I'd like put it at
>>>>>>> least on update-testing. I can made a list of the packages, with
>>>>>>> ffmpeg / x264 dependencies, that should stay on update-testing for more
>>>>>>> time than usual, but is not my decision .  
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ffmpeg-2.4.1 has now been built. I will take care of rebuilding mplayer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Julian
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, please wait, let's wait to know if kwizart allow us to put ffmpeg
>>>>> 2.3.3 in F20, we think it is better and we have strong reasons , like
>>>>> explained in
>>>>> https://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2014-September/017393.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Kwizart , do you allow this exception ? 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, 
>>>>>
>>>> Just to be clear: I only pushed it to devel. F20 is still an open question.
>>>
>>> yes , but I want copy from devel to F20, the state of art , before
>>> upgrading to ffmpeg 2.4 , and it is more easier , clean etc , if just
>>> after this (update ffmpeg to 2.4) . ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, 
>>>
>> If we ever decide to upgrade f20 (which I don't think we will given the
>> current fiasco), please do not overwrite the f20 spec with f21 one. I
>> suggest comparing the two and upgrading in parallel, something like git
>> cherry-pick.
> 
> Hi , Julian , that is the point, this is cvs , we don't have "upgrading
> in parallel", I try rolling devel to branches and yes "overwrite the f20
> spec" and what is in f20 spec is discard. Is the only rule of
> organization that we have .

I was not aware we have that rule. Until now, I was maintaining seperate
branches for ffmpeg and mplayer. I still believe that upgrading F-20
independently is better as it preserves the history better.

> 
> But the main problem was and still is, lack of time , so I and kwizart
> (writing off-list) haven't much time next days and he point to try again
> (the mass rebuild) no this weekend but next weekend, meantime
> ffmpeg-2.3.3 still on devel (I think) . 
> 
> This is an ancient system so it give much work do all mass rebuild, see
> if we can make a new builder happen.
> 
> Kwizart roll back to ffmpeg-2.3 , because though we haven't patches for
> vlc build against ffmpeg2-4 and lack of time of course . 

What was wrong with the vlc patch I linked to?

> 
> Please be patient ...
> 
Julian