Re: gstreamer-plugins-bad incompatibility with latest x264 from ATrpms

------=_Part_73954_32108359.1222181723871
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Hi Matthias,

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 06:41, Matthias Saou <
thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net> wrote:

> Andre Costa wrote :
>
> > I have been using Freshrpms "forever" already (thks Matthias! =)), but
> > recently enabled ATrpms in order to upgrade mplayerplug-in to a more
> recent
> > version in order to try to be able to view trailers from Apple movie
> > trailers site once again. mplayerplug-in upgrade went by just fine[*],
> but
> > ATrpms contains a more recent version of x264 that breaks
> > gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.7-2.fc9, which depends on
> > x264-0.0.0-0.6.20080510.fc9 from Freshrpms.
> >
> > What's the recommended solution for this situation? Can Freshrpms and
> ATrpms
> > be mixed at all?
>
> Very typical. x264, just like ffmpeg and a few others, are software
> which constantly evolves, with the library soname bumping all the time,
> so it's really hard for everyone to provide the same version, as the
> very latest always has something cool or useful, but implies having to
> make a whole bunch of rebuilds, possibly fixing bugs but introducing
> new ones.
>
> Short answer : Mixing repos has never been easy... your current
> solution is to wait for a version of mplayerplug-in that works
> anyway ;-) And once you get that, either switch to ATrpms, or notify me
> so that the freshrpms package also gets updated.
>
> Matthias
>

Sorry to bring this back, I know inter-repo compatibility is not necessarily
a top priority, but Axel made some changes to the packaging of libx264 so
that it could (theoretically) be compatible with other repos, but he said:

"Well, as outlined ATrpms is already splitting the package in a multirepo
friendly way. But it also needs the other repos to take similar steps. And I
don't have write access to freshrpms. :)"

http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/2008-September/009765.html

Is there any chance this could be sorted out or are Freshrpms and ATrpms
destined not to co-exist? BTW: today I experienced a similar issue with
latest upgrades for "lame", which conflicted with libmp3lame0 from ATrpms...

Please, notice I am not trying to push anything, it's just that I think the
community would benefit immensely if these 2 major repos could be used
together, and it seems Axel is willing to adapt ATrpms so that it could be
possible. But, I can't really judge if what he's proposing is enough or even
the right thing to do...

Regards,

Andre

------=_Part_73954_32108359.1222181723871
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

<div dir="ltr">Hi Matthias,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 06:41, Matthias Saou <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net">thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Andre Costa wrote :<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
&gt; I have been using Freshrpms &quot;forever&quot; already (thks Matthias! =)), but<br>
&gt; recently enabled ATrpms in order to upgrade mplayerplug-in to a more recent<br>
&gt; version in order to try to be able to view trailers from Apple movie<br>
&gt; trailers site once again. mplayerplug-in upgrade went by just fine[*], but<br>
&gt; ATrpms contains a more recent version of x264 that breaks<br>
&gt; gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.7-2.fc9, which depends on<br>
&gt; x264-0.0.0-0.6.20080510.fc9 from Freshrpms.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; What&#39;s the recommended solution for this situation? Can Freshrpms and ATrpms<br>
&gt; be mixed at all?<br>
<br>
</div>Very typical. x264, just like ffmpeg and a few others, are software<br>
which constantly evolves, with the library soname bumping all the time,<br>
so it&#39;s really hard for everyone to provide the same version, as the<br>
very latest always has something cool or useful, but implies having to<br>
make a whole bunch of rebuilds, possibly fixing bugs but introducing<br>
new ones.<br>
<br>
Short answer : Mixing repos has never been easy... your current<br>
solution is to wait for a version of mplayerplug-in that works<br>
anyway ;-) And once you get that, either switch to ATrpms, or notify me<br>
so that the freshrpms package also gets updated.<br>
<br>
Matthias<br>
</blockquote></div><br>Sorry to bring this back, I know inter-repo compatibility is not necessarily a top priority, but Axel made some changes to the packaging of libx264 so that it could (theoretically) be compatible with other repos, but he said:<br>
<br>&quot;Well, as outlined ATrpms is already splitting the package in a multirepo friendly way. But it also needs the other repos to take similar steps. And I don&#39;t have write access to freshrpms. :)&quot;<br><br><a href="http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/2008-September/009765.html">http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/2008-September/009765.html</a><br>
<br>Is there any chance this could be sorted out or are Freshrpms and ATrpms destined not to co-exist? BTW: today I experienced a similar issue with latest upgrades for &quot;lame&quot;, which conflicted with libmp3lame0 from ATrpms...<br>
<br>Please, notice I am not trying to push anything, it&#39;s just that I think the community would benefit immensely if these 2 major repos could be used together, and it seems Axel is willing to adapt ATrpms so that it could be possible. But, I can&#39;t really judge if what he&#39;s proposing is enough or even the right thing to do...<br>
<br>Regards,<br><br>Andre<br></div>

------=_Part_73954_32108359.1222181723871--