Hi Matthias, Thanks for answer. See below.
Matthias Schneider wrote: > Hi Eugen, > see my answers inline. > > > > --- Eugen Dedu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am So, 18.5.2008: > >> Von: Eugen Dedu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Betreff: Re: [Ekiga-devel-list] Ekiga and x264 in Debian main (was Re: >> Trunk: OPAL Fax problem) >> An: "Ekiga development mailing list" <ekiga-devel-list@gnome.org> >> Datum: Sonntag, 18. Mai 2008, 15:53 >> Matthias Schneider wrote: >>> Quoting Luca Capello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>>> Hi there! >>>> >>>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 11:47:38 +0200, Damien Sandras >> wrote: >>>>> Le jeudi 08 mai 2008 à 11:45 +0200, Torsten >> Schlabach a écrit : >>>>>> Gismo / Luca wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> If ekiga build-depends on >>>>>>> x264 (which, BTW, is *still* not >> present as a Debian package, neither in >>>>>>> non-free), ekiga itself will have to >> be put in non-free, which is >>>>>>> something I won't prefer. >>>>>> No, we don't want that I think. >>>>> It is a pwlib plugin, so it can be packaged >> separately, and that >>>>> specific plugin can be put in non-free. >>>> Isn't instead an OPAL dependency? However, >> this won't solve anything, >>>> as far as I understood Matthias at [1]. But as a >> disclaimer, I haven't >>>> checked ekiga trunk lately. >>>> >>>> Please re-read the definition of the Debian >> categories [2]: a Debian >>>> package to be in main (thus distributed with >> official CDs) must >>>> build-depend only on software present in main. >>>> >>>> This means that if opal build-depends on x264 >> (which is, let's say, in >>>> non-free), then opal cannot be part of main. My >> previous statement that >>>> in this case opal (well, I wrote ekiga...) has to >> be put in non-free is >>>> wrong: opal can go into contrib, since opal itself >> is a "free package >>>> which requires [...] a non-free package for >> compilation". As a result, >>>> ekiga has to be put in contrib, since ekiga >> build-depends on opal, which >>>> isn't in main. >>>> >>>> This situation will slow ekiga adoption, which is >> something I don't want >>>> to see. >>>> >>>> Thx, bye, >>>> Gismo / Luca >>>> >>>> Footnotes: >>>> [1] >> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/ekiga-devel-list/2008-May/msg00023.html >>>> [2] >> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-sections >>> Sorry, forgot to send the following mail to the >> list...: >>> About the packages issue, I suppose that there should >> be packages like this: >>> ekiga >>> opal includes h.261 & theora or depends opal-h261 >> & oapl-theora >>> ptlib >>> opal-h263p depends libavcodec >>> opal-mpeg4 depends libavcodec >>> opal-h264 depends libavcodec & libx264 >>> opal / opal-theora depends libtheora >>> >>> ekiga/opal recommends opal-h263p, mpeg4, x264 >>> >>> The opal-x packages can have different states on >> ubuntu or debian, whether there >>> is a non-free or whatever repository or some >> unofficial add-on repository... >> >> Hi, >> >> I am doing the proposed modifications, thanks for the idea. >> >> 1. I grouped all libpt-snapshot-plugins-* packages into one >> package, >> libpt-snapshot-plugins. > > Is this a good idea? I think stable has many separate plugins, since each > plugin has different dependencies, at least I think so... In Kilian's debs and in actual debian ones, all libpt-plugins-* depend on the same packages. So it should be ok. >> 2. Does opal, which is a library, depend on libspeex, or >> ekiga? > OPAL does, for echo cancelation, and of course the speex plugin does for the > speex codec itself. Ok. >> 3. For opal, I see the following video codecs: >> libopal-snapshot/usr/lib/ptlib-snapshot/opal-3.3.0/codecs/video: >> total 776 >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 344240 May 17 22:16 >> h261-vic_video_pwplugin.so >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 107144 May 17 22:16 >> h263-1998_video_pwplugin.so >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 63000 May 17 22:16 >> h263-ffmpeg_video_pwplugin.so >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 79352 May 17 22:16 >> h264_video_pwplugin.so >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 dedu 40168 May 17 22:16 >> h264_video_pwplugin_helper >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 81624 May 17 22:16 >> mpeg4-ffmpeg_video_pwplugin.so >> -rw-r--r-- 1 dedu 65088 May 17 22:16 >> theora_video_pwplugin.so >> >> Should both h263-1998 and h263-ffmpeg be put in the >> opal-h263 package? >> What's the difference between them? Is there one >> better than another, >> and the other can be removed? > > Consider them different codecs. H.263+ (1998) is the newer one, not > compatible withe H.263 (at least their encapsulation). H.263 has been > declared obsolete by IETF, but not by ITU. H.263 depends on a hackish patched > version of ffmpeg, while all the other codecs depend on "normal" ffmpeg. I > propose to leave it out for now (and stick only to H.263+), if it is ok for > damien. Ok, I wait Damien's reply. >> Also, is the h264_video_pwplugin_helper file useful or is a >> packaging error? > Both > h264_video_pwplugin.so > and > h264_video_pwplugin_helper > belong to the h264 package. The helper is the gpled executable that loads the > x264 library. Ok. >> Finally, is it possible to compile h264 only? If yes, what >> is the >> ./configure or ./autogen.sh command line? I will look >> myself too, but >> if you already know the answer, please tell me. > > No, not really... Does this help in the package building? I will probably > revise the build system in the future, but I do not know if I want to put so > much effort in the current one... Not really, in fact... Anyway, there should be two different diff.gz for debian and ubuntu... Eugen _______________________________________________ Ekiga-devel-list mailing list Ekiga-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/ekiga-devel-list
