MythTV for EL-6 discussion

[Jarod Wilson]

On Jan 5, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:45 AM, David Timms <dtimms at iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> Are some packages redhat ones ?
>> some fedora-epel ?
>> and eg ffmpeg etc are RPM Fusion
> 
> Well, we don't actually need ffmpeg since MythTV (for better or worse)
> bundles it's own, but it is currently a requirement of some of the
> other packages that MythTV is dependent on, so we'll have to work
> around those.

Most of those aren't hard deps. Way back when, they were required for non-recordings
video playback, but the internal player can handle all (or at least most) of that now,
so they're really just supplemental bits, for the most part.


>> If redhat aren't willing to update, you might be screwed. EPEL still might
>> take convincing and reject (for those, would we use an internal lib instead
>> to work around the problem ?, or disable that functionality in the packages,
>> with a notes to say why ?).
> 
> Yes, we are running into a bit of that and since the policy of Fedora
> and RPM Fusion to not provide packages that are available in RHEL we
> could very well be screwed, but I'm going to keep trying. Since ATRPMS
> provides an EL version of Myth I'm assuming they do not share that
> policy.

Another for better or worse case, ATrpms plays by its own rules. It does provide some
newer packages of things already provided by the distro, among other diversions
from both upstream Fedora packaging guidelines and the RPM Fusion ones.


> I think the biggest roadblock at this point is "v4l" where the RHEL
> version is quite old, however, Hans[1] is trying to appeal to the RHEL
> QA gods to see if he can convince them.

Hm. There's newer v4l-utils in EPEL... But no libv4l. Looks like its been packaged to
have a private libv4l copy or some such thing. Was thinking that could be used, but
maybe not.

-j