On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:06:44 +0200 Alexander Leidinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Ion-Mihai Tetcu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Sun, 20 > Aug 2006 21:47:15 +0300): > > > On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:19:07 -0700 > > Matt Olander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I met with a developer of the Real Player at Linux World. She says > >> they would *love* to port a native version of the Real player to > >> FreeBSD. Yay! She even showed me that they have an older FreeBSD > >> dev environment set up and are ready to start to try compiling it > >> for release after we get it up to date. > > > > Yay ! Good work :) > > Now we just need to convince Adobe too... Yeh. > >> We need a couple of FreeBSD experts to assist with > >> questions/expertise/feedback to make sure this gets finished ;-) > >> Please send me your name/email off list and I'll reply to her with > >> a shortlist of who can help them. > > > > Since it's great to volunteer others ;-) maybe netchild@ (cc'ed) has > > time for this ? > > I don't mind helping out, if time permits. But I'm curious, why did > you suggest me? Hmm, let's see, you did work on sound and linux emulation :) They have a linux product that uses sound and video :) > >> -------- Original Message -------- > > > > [ ... ] > > > >> Also, we're currently only running nightly builds for the stable > >> branch on FreeBSD. Do you think we should be running the current > >> branch as well? That's where all the new functionality is going - > >> like playlists and Windows Media (ahem.. if you have a license for > >> it). Depending on how long porting work takes, FreeBSD may want to > >> just skip the currently released player and go for all the new > >> technology. > > > > From our point of view it would be no problem to have both in the > > Ports Tree (The second as -devel). > > This assumes they are willing to offer beta versions for public > testing instead of only building it "for personal pleasure". Yes, maybe we get lucky. > On a somewhat related topic, which FreeBSD build platforms are > targeted? 4.x, 5.x, 6.x, -current, i386, amd64, sparc64, ...? No reason to target 4.x and 5.x; IMO 6(-STABLE or the last _RELEASE), eventually -CURRENT on i386 and amd64 would be enough. > Regarding the architecture this is more out of curiosity on my side, > but for the FreeBSD versions I'm asking because we have a SoC > student working on implementing parts of the new Open Sound System > (OSS) API which may provide some benefits to realplayer. This code > will first arrive in -current (the SoC is coming to an end, so I will > commit this maybe next month... depending upon reviews and tests), > but I could try to come up with a patch for 6.x as well. A list of > new IOCTLs is at http://wiki.freebsd.org/RyanBeasley/ioctlref. With a > patch for 6.x they could check at runtime if the IOCTLs are supported > and use the new features if desired (= developing software for the > features of tomorrow... ;-) ). I also want to MFC some stuff in the > sound system (bug fixes and new drivers), so depending on their needs > I should do that "soon" or at least provide patches to them. And you ask why I thought of you ? :) -- IOnut Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"