Am Montag, 15. November 2010 schrieb Carl Eugen Hoyos: > Manfred Tremmel <manf...@...> writes: > > Am Montag, 15. November 2010 schrieb Pascal Bleser: > > > On 2010-11-15 14:53:26 (+0100), Pascal Bleser > > > > <pascal.ble...@...> wrote: > > > > On 2010-11-15 12:27:40 (+0000), Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceho...@...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > When I updated (only) ffmpeg today, libavcore was installed, > > > > > but libavutil was not automatically updated, leading to this > > > > > output: $ ffmpeg > > > > > ffmpeg: relocation error: /usr/lib64/libavcore.so.0: symbol > > > > > av_default_item_name, version LIBAVUTIL_50 not defined in > > > > > file libavutil.so.50 with link time reference > > > > > > > > Seems like ffmpeg is missing explicit Requires on the libraries > > > > that spawn out of it. > > > > > > On a side not: thank you very much ffmpeg upstream to not care > > > about releases and proper SONAMEs, this is really a mess we have > > > to take care of as packagers, and it's a major pain in the bottom > > > *sigh* > > > > This never should happen if you do a "zypper up" or "zypper dup" is > > done, because there's allways updated the complete package. > > That is exactly what I did today (I did not update manually) and the > libraries where NOT updated (which - one could argue - might be ok, > because this works most of the time, but not with the introduction > of libavcore which needs a newer libavutil; additionally, it > probably makes no sense regarding the cause of the update). > > Let me repeat that I think it is very good of Packman not to use > (so-called) "released" versions of FFmpeg, but to update regularly.
Ok, then this must be because of the "downgrade" of the build numbers because of switching the build repository to testing, otherwise I can't see what situation can keep zypper away from doing a correct update. > Please actually read the licenses before making such statements (that > do not really add confidence): The system libraries are explicitely > mentioned in the licenses (that - iirc - were written at a time when > no free system libraries existed for real world applications). Ok, you are right. I've reed the GPL and LICENSE file from ffmpeg and yes, I've made a mistake. I've also turned of building libfaac support in my daily snapshot. > Let me add the following: Originally, we all did not know that > libfaac was never free software, so we (FFmpeg developers) can > hardly blame anybody who distributes an old FFmpeg version compiled > as GPL and linked against libfaac. Since I've explained now that > libfaac is non-free and you cannot link a GPL'ed software against a > non-free library, please stop distributing such binaries. Done. -- Machs gut | http://www.iivs.de/schwinde/buerger/tremmel/ Manfred | http://packman.links2linux.de/ _______________________________________________ Packman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman
