On Monday, 27 February 2012 at 19:57, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:41 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann'
Mierzejewski
wrote:
> On Friday, 24 February 2012 at 17:32, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > as a quick answer
> >
> > On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 10:00 +0100, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> > > Can you please pick a known version of x264 from RPM Fusion devel,
> > > branch.
> >
> > well ./configure of ffmpeg requires x264 >= 0.118 which x264 from RPM
> > Fusion devel doesn't met that require.
> >
> > > Maintaining x264 is another issue.
> > > I had a problem with more recent snapshot, specially as the patch
> > > didn't applied and need to be reworked.
> >
> > I had rework the patch .
http://www.serjux.com/mplayer/x264-nover.patch
>
> That patch is probably wrong. I'll take a look at how to do it better
> and get back to you.
It was a quick fix, Joe do this which is better
http://www.serjux.com/mplayer/x264-nover.joe.patch
Anyway I don't know if you have time but I my opinion rpm version should
be 0.120 and not 0.0.0-0.34 .
"cat /usr/include/x264_config.h
(...)
#define X264_POINTVER "0.120.2151 a3f4407"
I see that x264 is version 0.120 ! "
Fedora guidelines say we should use 0 for version if upstream doesn't
do releases. We moved to 0.0.0 when RPMFusion was created to provide
an upgrade path from Freshrpms. I have no objections to using what you
suggest if you think it'll make life easier for anyone.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion
http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer
http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"