Re: [Patch] Add src/video_dec/group_raw.h in the tarball

Hi,

> I don't know what the release process for xine-lib is.
> Probably Darren Salt would know.
> I've tried to ping him about the tarball a couple times on IRC,
> but no luck so far...
> I was also requesting a new release before that, as 1.2.6 is/was
> 2 years old and you (and others) have added quite some good stuff
> in-between.

There is another indiction for his absence -- spam mails coming
via the xine-devel list, and no one "nuking that guys subscription"
as they suggested/did at the Xorg list that I'm in too.

> It's really nice you tagged a release, I wouldn't have
> noticed the tarball generation issue w/o it.

OK :-)
In fact, I always used my own bash scripts for that (and for
preparing diffs for hg uploads). Having to do a ./configure first
to build a _source_ tarball looks unlogical to me anyway.

> A tag is useful when you want to mark some particular point in
> development, like a release.

Thanks.

>> Do we need to set another tag when fixed?
> Possibly, as it's not possible to build from a tarball released
> from the xine-lib 1.2.7 tag

How about a "1.2.7-release", when everything is tested OK?

>> And why does v1.2.7 install plugins to the 2.6 dir?
> Plugin abi change ?

No, I mean the 2._6_ vs 1.2._7_ thing. That off by one seems
to be there from the very beginning. Probably not that serious.

> Started as a playground, grown up into lot of self-hosted
> services that keep me (somewhat) out of Google and others
> privacy invading tentacles

Well, my "solution" is to avoid anything with a "smart" in
its name :-/

> I still very much care about xine-lib. Actually I'm
> maintaining it for a 3rd party Fedora repository, RPM Fusion,
> as ffmpeg is not allowed in Fedora proper because of software
> patent issues.

In that case, my "detach everything from libav* that does not
really use it" series might be useful at last.
Although I primarily did that to restore the original xine
idea of modularity and diversification.

> Speaking of this, there are currently 2 patches needed for
> the Fedora package, it would be nice if they can be reviewed
> and pushed.

OK, doing that.
Already got a fix for that multilib issue (not sure whether
I introduce another regression there).
For xcb, things may take a bit because I forgot to download
the actual patches attached to [1] (still no inet here).

> Also, there might be something more to fix in the tarball
> generation. The second problem I alluded to in my first email
> was some missing files in the tarball for ffmpeg, namely
> mkcodeclist.pl, avcodec_video.list and xine_video.list.
> I generated a tarball that contained them after installing
> ffmpeg-devel, but I think they should be unconditionally
> added when generating the tarball.

Thank you for that hint. I was able to reproduce it here
through ./configure --disable-ffmpeg, and my upload should
fix that.

Regards,
Torsten


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi