On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 05:34:02PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > Diego Biurrun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, but as outlined below, it's not different from other multimedia > > players wrt patents. > > Bugs in some package already in debian doesn't let another package > with those bugs in as a right, though. It just means we have bugs > to deal with.
Yes. Still Debian's position needs to be consistent and credible as well. If MPlayer has problem X and therefore cannot enter Debian, then the other multimedia players sharing problem X would have to be removed, wouldn't they? > I'm not quite sure what sort of statement about patents will > convince ftpmasters. Maybe knowing what patents held by who are > definitely infringed by mplayer is good, especially if none of > them are actively enforced, or maybe it is bad. Maybe just > knowing that no mplayer distributors are currently threatened > is enough, No MPlayer distributors are currently threatened, nor have they been in the past. > or maybe nothing mplayer team will be good enough and > we need to get a lawyerly opinion. Sorry, I don't understand this sentence, could you please clarify? > I hate software patents too. We all do *sigh*. > > > My summary of the issue is http://people.debian.org/~mjr/mplayer > > Nice summary. One point is not fully correct, though: > > 2. DeCSS code: removed and mplayer-debian uses libdvdread3 instead > > libdvdread is not a replacement for libdvdcss. Instead of using the builtin > > libdvdcss the Debian package dynamically loads a libdvdcss that might be > > present on the system in question. > > So libdvdread3 is used anyway, or have I misunderstood? MPlayer includes both libdvdcss and libdvdread in the libmpdvdkit2 directory. IIRC Andrea removed it and decided to link to the Debian libdvdread dynamically. Diego -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
