ffmpeg for EL7

[Orion Poplawski]

On 08/26/2016 01:35 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2016-08-26 0:23 GMT+02:00 Orion Poplawski <orion at cora.nwra.com>:
>> On 08/25/2016 02:30 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>> 2016-08-25 22:19 GMT+02:00 Orion Poplawski <orion at cora.nwra.com>:
>>>> On 08/25/2016 06:28 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 10:24, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/25/2016 10:01 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Specially as ffmpeg doesn't do symbol version, if one process has
>>>>>>> dependencies using both version, it will crash.
>>>>>> AFAIU, as long as these packages are properly linked (and not libraries
>>>>>> not being dlopened), package deps on SONAMEs would conflict and thus
>>>>>> prevent such problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> The point is that not all SONAMEs change with each FFmpeg version bump,
>>>>> so, for example, ffmpeg-3.0.x and ffmpeg-3.1.x may have mostly the same
>>>>> SONAMEs.
>>>>
>>>> Here is an attempt at ffmpeg2.8 and ffmpeg3.0.  This relies on different
>>> I've strictly no question about how not to make conflict between
>>> theses, so I'm not even looking at your spec since I don't think they
>>> will bring any value to the "discution".
>>> Please have a look at ffmpeg-compat for not conflicting with -devel
>>> Also please have a look this for not conflicting with ffmpeg version
>>> of the same ABI:
>>> http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/16/SRPMS/ffmpeg4vlc-0.6-0.4.20100612svn.fc13.src.rpm
>>> Here are the ABI from ffmpeg upstream: http://ffmpeg.org/download.html#releases
>>
>> Well, I'll give you the courtesy of looking at your specs, even if you won't
>> do the same for me.
> You are still in the "How not to make conflicts" question whereas this
> question is out of interest over "which version to choose for a
> general usage."

I'm trying to be concerned with the question - "What happens when the version
needed for general usage changes?  How can that be done in the least impactful
way by planning for that transition now?"

> You are still in the false premise that you can have any versions as
> soon as they do not conflict for general usage and let packagers
> choose theirs.

Why is this a false premise?  It seems perfectly reasonable to have ffmpeg2.8
to start, and add a ffmpeg3.X when there is a critical mass of other software
that requires it.  And then keep sliding this forward as necessary, and then
when necessary dropping the old ffmpeg2.8, etc. when they are unsupportable.
We're talking 8 more years for EL7 to be around.

> You have also ignored several of my earlier comments, so I wouldn't
> say courtesy is on your side here.

I certainly didn't do so intentionally.  I've just replied to an earlier
email, perhaps that helps.

> This discussion has gone wrong, so I'm dropping here.

Deep breath, start again.

-- 
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office             FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane                       orion at nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301                   http://www.nwra.com