Re: ffmpeg-2.4 released

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... >>>>> >>>>> 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