Re: ffmpeg for EL7
On Sex, 2016-08-26 at 13:11 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
On Friday, 26 August 2016 at 09:35, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
[...]
>
> You are still in the "How not to make conflicts" question whereas
> this
> question is out of interest over "which version to choose for a
> general usage."
> You are still in the false premise that you can have any versions
> as
> soon as they do not conflict for general usage and let packagers
> choose theirs.
> You have also ignored several of my earlier comments, so I wouldn't
> say courtesy is on your side here.
>
> This discussion has gone wrong, so I'm dropping here.
Nicolas, that was rather not excellent. Please explain why we can't
have any version as long as they don't conflict for general usage?
The oldest FFmpeg branch currently listed on the download page
is 2.5.x, which was branched in December 2014 and last updated
in February 2016. The last major ABI bump was between 2.8 and 3.0.
Landing here, yes for me make sense f23 version (ffmpeg-2.8.7-1.fc23 )
is well tested
I do think that it makes sense to ship 2.8.7 and 3.1.2 in EPEL7
and drop 2.8.x when the next ABI-incompatible version is released.
Upgrades between minor versions should be possible without rebuilds.
I'm not seeing how we could install 2 versions of ffmpeg (I not read
all thread) but IMO ffmpeg-2.8.7 should be the main package .
I peeked to Orion ffmpeg specs and I think main ffmpeg shouldn't have
versionsuffix , neither alternatives would work here ...
Conclusion, IMHO ffmpeg-2.8.7 should be the main package and we could
build it right now and maybe later also ship one (just one) more
version of ffmpeg (3.1.2) , with versionsuffix if not conflicts, I
think will not have conflicts, but not as alternative
(/etc/alternatives)
What issues do you see with that plan? You said it yourself that
2.8.x
is well-supported by the packages that depend on FFmpeg. By the time
of the next ABI bump, I expect support for 3.x will have become
equally good.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Sérgio M. B.