Re: libx264 update for F16?
2012/10/22 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>:
On Seg, 2012-10-22 at 09:00 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2012/10/15 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>:
> > What's the chance of getting x264 updated in F16? The current version
> > (116) is too old for MythTV 0.26 and I'd like to keep the same version
> > across all releases. I only need >=118 but the same version as is
> > available in EL-6 would be great.
>
> What is the need of newer ABI ? is it because of ffmpeg built within
> mythtv ? or mythtv code that dropped older x264 API ?
Hi, x264 don't have a new ABI , just a soname bump , which will leads to
dependency problems with yum
No you are wrong.
Unless the upstream developers miss understand how things work, a
version change in a SONAME is the consequence of an ABI breaks by the
removal of any symbol.
If you don't have any ABI changes but a SONAME change, then the
developer is wrong and you could fix the SONAME and packages using a
given library will still run.
On EL-6 we have x264 updated as in F-17 and if we have it on EL-6
why
not on F16 ?
Because we were still in updates-testing repository and the EL-6
branch in RPM Fusion was in development. So the development behaviour
was relevant.
Nicolas (kwizart)