libx264 update for F16?

[Sérgio Basto]

On Ter, 2012-10-23 at 08:44 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: 
> 2012/10/22 Sérgio Basto <sergio at serjux.com>:
> > On Seg, 2012-10-22 at 09:00 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> >> 2012/10/15 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069 at 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.

Or maybe I'm packaging this wrongly and should be 
/usr/lib/libx264.so.0 instead /usr/lib/libx264.so.120
Since, version is 0.120 .
I have to study that ...

Thanks, 

> > 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)

-- 
Sérgio M. B.