libx264 update for F16?

[Nicolas Chauvet]

2012/10/23 Sérgio Basto <sergio at serjux.com>:
> 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 .
No , this is already accurate. Unfortunately the libx264 ABI isn't
advertised as stable.

Nicolas (kwizart)