9:46 a.m.
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Bug ID: 4258
Summary: Review request: libav - Audio and video processing
libraries
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Hardware: All
OS: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P1
Component: Review Request
Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Reporter: anto.trande(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
SPEC: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz6cHSZ6ZzsYQ3RHNE8xMmVJYlU
SRPM: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz6cHSZ6ZzsYUDNnbjUwcTZpVEk
%description
Libav provides cross-platform tools and libraries to convert,
manipulate and stream a wide range of multimedia formats and protocols.
This package is not eligible on Fedora because it needs unavailable packages.
## rpmlint output
$ rpmlint libav-11.7-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm libav-debuginfo-11.7-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
libav-devel-11.7-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm libav-tools-11.7-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
../../SRPMS/libav-11.7-1.fc24.src.rpm
libav-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libav-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
9:47 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |https://libav.org/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
9:55 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
Scratch builds on f24-free:
http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32497
There is a configuration problem by activating "opencv" support; i'm
contacting
upstream.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
10:03 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> ---
FYI, why do you need this library and not ffmpeg instead ?
You are using a build suffix, so it should co-install with ffmpeg-libs but then
you cannot mix dependencies build with ffmpeg and thoses built with libva.
We probably need to adapt %{name}-enforcing_system_crypto_policies.patch for
ffmpeg. Can you send your patch to ffmpeg upstream also (if needed).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
10:14 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Nicolas Chauvet from comment #2)
FYI, why do you need this library and not ffmpeg instead ?
You are using a build suffix, so it should co-install with ffmpeg-libs but
then you cannot mix dependencies build with ffmpeg and thoses built with
libva.
I used ffmpeg too; 'libav' would be simply a (good?) alternative.
For example, 'devede' uses both 'ffmpeg' and 'avconv' (from
libav).
We probably need to adapt %{name}-enforcing_system_crypto_policies.patch for
ffmpeg. Can you send your patch to ffmpeg upstream also (if needed).
I followed instructions from Fedora guidelines. Let me see if i know how to
patch 'ffmpeg'.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
3:05 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
'libav-11' looks incompatible with 'opencv-3.1.0', it's disabled on
Fedora >24.
Package ready for reviewing.
SPEC: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz6cHSZ6ZzsYN2NXSUdFSUdpUkU
SRPM: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz6cHSZ6ZzsYbVdxcmhSX3ZYb1k
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
3:06 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
4:23 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Ben Rosser <rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com
Assignee|rpmfusion-package-review@rp |rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com
|mfusion.org |
--- Comment #5 from Ben Rosser <rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com> ---
Taken.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
6:25 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dominik(a)greysector.net
--- Comment #6 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net>
---
Is there any real need for this package in RPMFusion? FFmpeg is almost 100%
backwards compatible with libav. The one package that I thought still used
bundled libav (gstreamer1-libav) actually switched back to FFmpeg last year.
Most of the symbols in the provided libraries have the same names, so you'd
have to be extremely careful not to end up with another package depending on
both ffmpeg-libs and libav in the future. Since libvdpau-va-gl (the
vaapi-to-vdpau bridge that's required to use Intel GPUs via vdpau) depends on
ffmpeg-libs, this might be trickier than you think. Even renaming the libraries
and their sonames won't help here. You'd have to rename the symbols, too.
So, I'm against including this package in RPMFusion because it introduces a
world of potential trouble without any clear technical benefits.
But of course I'm open to any counter-arguments.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:09 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #7 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #6)
Is there any real need for this package in RPMFusion? FFmpeg is
almost 100%
backwards compatible with libav. The one package that I thought still used
bundled libav (gstreamer1-libav) actually switched back to FFmpeg last year.
Most of the symbols in the provided libraries have the same names, so you'd
have to be extremely careful not to end up with another package depending on
both ffmpeg-libs and libav in the future. Since libvdpau-va-gl (the
vaapi-to-vdpau bridge that's required to use Intel GPUs via vdpau) depends
on ffmpeg-libs, this might be trickier than you think. Even renaming the
libraries and their sonames won't help here. You'd have to rename the
symbols, too.
We could set Conflicts tag to prevent 'libav' installation if FFmpeg is already
installed (and viceversa).
I don't know which one is the better today, but upstream says that 'FFmpeg'
and
'libav' are different especially at API level.
I think that if it's possible, we can provide both and leave the choice to the
developers.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:29 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
--- Comment #8 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #7)
...
I think that if it's possible, we can provide both and leave the
choice to
the developers.
A very good quote about this:
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:24 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 4258] Review request: libav - Audio and video processing libraries
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4258
Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Blocks|2 |
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Assignee|rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com |rpmfusion-package-review@rp
| |mfusion.org
--- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande(a)gmail.com> ---
Package refused.
Thanks to all.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
2990
days inactive
2992
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
11 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
RPM Fusion Bugzilla