FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Masters Of The Universe

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-20-2007, 02:51 PM
"Mario Limonciello"
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

The other day John Dong and I were talking on IRC about the current situation with ffmpeg.* There are two versions of ffmpeg (and some related applications) out there: one on our archive and one on medibuntu.* The one on medibuntu is the same source package as the one in our archive but it is built with encoders.


Personally I think its really unfortunate to have to do it this way.* It seems like the exact reason that we have an area like multiverse.* Several ffmpeg and lame based projects already live there.

John had said he thinks the plan was to eventually move ffmpeg into main, so there wouldn't be much expectation to move it from universe to multiverse and just turn everything on.* To this I proposed that we would modify the source package for ffmpeg to generate binaries twice.* The free binaries could end up in universe or main whereas the non free would end up in multiverse.


In order to avoid confusion and the necessity of using Replaces/Conflicts, a third virtual package binary that depends on either the free | non-free variant can also be generated.

This same approach can then be used for the non-free amarok changes, bmp changes, mplayer changes and xmms changes.


Before just going out there and making these drastic changes, we wanted to get input from the rest of the MOTU team to see what the thought of this would be.* So what do people think?

Regards,

--
Mario Limonciello
superm1@gmail.com
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-20-2007, 03:13 PM
Stefan Potyra
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Hi,

Am Dienstag, 20. November 2007 16:51 schrieb Mario Limonciello:
> The other day John Dong and I were talking on IRC about the current
> situation with ffmpeg. There are two versions of ffmpeg (and some related
> applications) out there: one on our archive and one on medibuntu. The one
> on medibuntu is the same source package as the one in our archive but it is
> built with encoders.
>
> Personally I think its really unfortunate to have to do it this way. It
> seems like the exact reason that we have an area like multiverse. Several
> ffmpeg and lame based projects already live there.
>
> John had said he thinks the plan was to eventually move ffmpeg into main,
> so there wouldn't be much expectation to move it from universe to
> multiverse and just turn everything on. To this I proposed that we would
> modify the source package for ffmpeg to generate binaries twice. The free
> binaries could end up in universe or main whereas the non free would end up
> in multiverse.

hm... I have heard that a universe source package could generate binaries for
both universe and multiverse, but I'm quite sure that it's not possible to
have a multiverse source package generate a main binary. So that would
probably mean that the patent encumbered source would (once ffmpeg moves to
main) reside in main, not too sure if that's ok.

>
> In order to avoid confusion and the necessity of using Replaces/Conflicts,
> a third virtual package binary that depends on either the free | non-free
> variant can also be generated.

Sorry I don't understand this right now. What would that virtual package
solve?

Cheers,
Stefan.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-20-2007, 05:43 PM
Brandon Holtsclaw
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

I have one question, so since multiverse is turned on in the
sources.list on a default install ( but nothing is installed from it ) ,
and I install Ubuntu proper, THEN install amarok ontop of that, will apt
prefer the free or non-free version ?

Other than that I'm all for it.

--
Brandon Holtsclaw
imbrandon@kubuntu.org
http://www.imbrandon.com
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-20-2007, 07:55 PM
"Mario Limonciello"
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Hi,

On Nov 20, 2007 10:13 AM, Stefan Potyra <stefan.potyra@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:
hm... I have heard that a universe source package could generate binaries for
both universe and multiverse, but I'm quite sure that it's not possible to
have a multiverse source package generate a main binary. So that would

probably mean that the patent encumbered source would (once ffmpeg moves to
main) reside in main, not too sure if that's ok.

There are plenty of main source packages that can generate universe/multiverse, but I believe you're right that it can't go the other way around.

Well the thing is afaik that there are no source changes currently on the medibuntu package.* It's soley a mangling of configure flags.
*

>
> In order to avoid confusion and the necessity of using Replaces/Conflicts,
> a third virtual package binary that depends on either the free | non-free
> variant can also be generated.


Sorry I don't understand this right now. What would that virtual package
solve?

This would allow all applications that depended upon ffmpeg to remain the same and not need debian/control mangling.* When ffmpeg was requested, the free variant would be installed by default.* If someone decided that they needed items from the non free variant, it would conflict with the free one but still satisfy ffmpeg (replacing the free one)

*
Cheers,
*Stefan.

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list

Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu




--
Mario Limonciello
superm1@gmail.com
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-20-2007, 07:55 PM
"Mario Limonciello"
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

apt would still prefer that the free one by default.* The non free would only be installed should someone request it explicitly.

On Nov 20, 2007 12:43 PM, Brandon Holtsclaw <
imbrandon@kubuntu.org> wrote:
I have one question, so since multiverse is turned on in the

sources.list on a default install ( but nothing is installed from it ) ,
and I install Ubuntu proper, THEN install amarok ontop of that, will apt
prefer the free or non-free version ?

Other than that I'm all for it.


--
Brandon Holtsclaw
imbrandon@kubuntu.org
http://www.imbrandon.com



--
Mario Limonciello
superm1@gmail.com
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-20-2007, 07:57 PM
"Mario Limonciello"
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Hi,

On Nov 20, 2007 10:13 AM, Stefan Potyra <stefan.potyra@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:

hm... I have heard that a universe source package could generate binaries for
both universe and multiverse, but I'm quite sure that it's not possible to
have a multiverse source package generate a main binary. So that would

probably mean that the patent encumbered source would (once ffmpeg moves to
main) reside in main, not too sure if that's ok.

There
are plenty of main source packages that can generate
universe/multiverse, but I believe you're right that it can't go the
other way around.

Well the thing is afaik that there are no source changes currently
on the medibuntu package.* It's soley a mangling of configure flags.
*


>
> In order to avoid confusion and the necessity of using Replaces/Conflicts,
> a third virtual package binary that depends on either the free | non-free
> variant can also be generated.


Sorry I don't understand this right now. What would that virtual package
solve?

This
would allow all applications that depended upon ffmpeg to remain the
same and not need debian/control mangling.* When ffmpeg was requested,
the free variant would be installed by default.* If someone decided
that they needed items from the non free variant, it would conflict
with the free one but still satisfy ffmpeg (replacing the free one)

*
Regards,

Mario

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-21-2007, 09:28 AM
Stefan Potyra
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Hi,

Am Dienstag, 20. November 2007 21:55 schrieb Mario Limonciello:
[..]
> Well the thing is afaik that there are no source changes currently on the
> medibuntu package. It's soley a mangling of configure flags.

Hm... that wouldn't make too much sense to me, allow a patent encumbered
source package but not patent encumbered binary packages *shrug*.

>
> > > In order to avoid confusion and the necessity of using
> >
> > Replaces/Conflicts,
> >
> > > a third virtual package binary that depends on either the free |
> >
> > non-free
> >
> > > variant can also be generated.
> >
> > Sorry I don't understand this right now. What would that virtual package
> > solve?
>
> This would allow all applications that depended upon ffmpeg to remain the
> same and not need debian/control mangling. When ffmpeg was requested, the
> free variant would be installed by default. If someone decided that they
> needed items from the non free variant, it would conflict with the free one
> but still satisfy ffmpeg (replacing the free one)

Ah, you're talking about the generated binary ffmpeg, whereas I was thinking
you would want to use some virtual packages for the generated libraries.
Sure, sounds sane.

Btw.: did you talk to siretart about this yet? I guess he could comment best
on it.

Cheers,
Stefan.
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-26-2007, 11:00 PM
Mario Limonciello
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Mario Limonciello wrote:
Hi,



On Nov 20, 2007 10:13 AM, Stefan Potyra <stefan.potyra@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
wrote:


There
are plenty of main source packages that can generate
universe/multiverse, but I believe you're right that it can't go the
other way around.


Well the thing is afaik that there are no source changes currently
on the medibuntu package.* It's soley a mangling of configure flags.

*


This
would allow all applications that depended upon ffmpeg to remain the
same and not need debian/control mangling.* When ffmpeg was requested,
the free variant would be installed by default.* If someone decided
that they needed items from the non free variant, it would conflict
with the free one but still satisfy ffmpeg (replacing the free one)


*


Regards,



Mario


John,



Since you've touched gtkpod, would you like to handle gtkpod and k3b?*
I'll take care of mplayer and ffmpeg?



Regards,



--
Mario Limonciello
superm1@ubuntu.com




--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-27-2007, 05:46 PM
Phillip Susi
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Stefan Potyra wrote:
> Hm... that wouldn't make too much sense to me, allow a patent encumbered
> source package but not patent encumbered binary packages *shrug*.

Makes sense to me... distributing the binary requires a license from the
patent holder... distributing the source code does not.



--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 
Old 11-27-2007, 09:16 PM
Reinhard Tartler
 
Default Proposing changes to multimedia stack

Phillip Susi <psusi@cfl.rr.com> writes:

> Stefan Potyra wrote:
>> Hm... that wouldn't make too much sense to me, allow a patent encumbered
>> source package but not patent encumbered binary packages *shrug*.
>
> Makes sense to me... distributing the binary requires a license from the
> patent holder... distributing the source code does not.

On what basis do you come to this conclusion? Can you provide some
evidence for this?

--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4

--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:04 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org