Updating F-20 to ffmpeg-2.2.10

[Sérgio Basto]

On Qua, 2014-11-05 at 07:33 +0100, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
> W dniu 05.11.2014 o 03:55, Sérgio Basto pisze:
> > On Dom, 2014-11-02 at 08:02 +0100, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
> >> W dniu 15.10.2014 o 07:42, Julian Sikorski pisze:
> >>> W dniu 15.10.2014 o 00:38, Sérgio Basto pisze:
> >>>> Hi, 
> >>>>
> >>>> On Ter, 2014-10-07 at 08:02 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote: 
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Please be advised that 2.3 was recently removed from the maintained
> >>>>> branches list:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2014-September/162904.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thus, if we ever rebase F-20, we should use 2.2 and not 2.3.
> >>>>
> >>>> The mode I like to work and to coordinate the mass rebuild for a stable
> >>>> branch (F-20), is first be test in devel . We have packages in devel, we
> >>>> test it for some time and when we can say that are stable , so we could
> >>>> *copy* to F-20 , another point was: mass rebuild was for ffmpeg/x264 ,
> >>>> not only ffmpeg .
> >>>> So it is important have .specs for packages that compile in all Fedora
> >>>> releases. Having 2 trees, one for F20, other for devel , is just
> >>>> justified when is a very core package like udev or systemd  ... , but
> >>>> for rpmfusion the point is other, maintainers are not aware ... 
> >>>> So *theoretically* my solution was build ffmpeg 2.2 in devel, test it
> >>>> and copy to F-20 , but devel already have 2.3 so is not practical . 
> >>>>
> >>>> Moving forward, just update "ffmpeg" on F20 seems to me acceptable ,
> >>>> like you wrote "only libavfilter has a soname bump (snip) This means
> >>>> that we really only need to rebuild dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc." but we
> >>>> miss the test phase, we need guarantee that ffmpeg version was tested ,
> >>>> any suggestion ?
> >>>
> >>> ffmpeg-2.2 was in devel between March and August. Moreover, the reason
> >>> why upstream picked it over 2.3 was that it is used by more downstream
> >>> distros: OpenSUSE, SUSE Enterprise and ROSA [1]. If we let it sit in
> >>> -testing for a bit longer than usual, I believe this will be enough.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Saying that and giving up mass rebuild ffmpeg/x264 for F-20, no need
> >>>> preserve devel as is and we can do the mass rebuild for ffmpeg 2.4 on
> >>>> devel , anything pending ?
> >>>
> >>> I don't think anything has changed since last time: dvbcut and
> >>> kmediafactory fail to rebuild, vlc needs a patch, everything else builds
> >>> fine. David Timms was working on making dvbcut work, but I have not
> >>> heard from him regarding whether he was successful.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW what packages (.spec) do you have ? that are different from stable
> >>>> branches to devel ?
> >>>
> >>> Only ffmpeg and mplayer. ffmpeg due to its numerous dependencies, and
> >>> mplayer because it is highly dependent on ffmpeg.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks and best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Thank you.
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Downstreams
> >>>
> >> Where do we stand on this?
> > 
> > I don't change must what I wrote :
> > "Update ffmpeg on F20 seems to me acceptable ,like you wrote "only
> > libavfilter has a soname bump ... This means that we really only need to
> > rebuild dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc."
> > 
> > I think you should decide and we need authorization from kwizart . 
> > 
> > you don't want rebuild others deps right ?  
> > 
> > 
> > cheers 
> > 
> I think we should go do it. 2.1 has not seen a release in months which
> means there might be unfixed security issues in it.
> I would only rebuild what we need to (dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc).

yes , we can use security police , we need update ffmpeg to 2.2.10 on
Fedora 20 , due security concerns . 

kwizart, may we do this update ?, we need your authorization, I will
rebuild dvdstyler, mpv and xbmc .  

I'm going test it meanwhile .

Thanks, 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.