On Monday 10 May 2010 03:38:52 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 23:27:28 (CEST), Andres Mejia wrote:
> > On Sunday 09 May 2010 17:07:35 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >> On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 09:35:19 (CEST),
> >> ceros-gu...@users.alioth.debian.org
> > 
> > wrote:
> >> > The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
> >> > commit 81c299a45ae49fe1acd96907c81b2b66af2e922f
> >> > Author: Andres Mejia <mcita...@gmail.com>
> >> > Date:   Sat May 8 03:34:09 2010 -0400
> >> > 
> >> >     Fix dependency problem for ffmpeg binary package when using extra
> >> >     ffmpeg libs.
> >> 
> >> I don't understand this patch. What is the issue here? Currently the
> >> ffmpeg package has dependency like these:
> >> 
> >> libavcodec52 (>= 4:0.5.1-3) | libavcodec-extra-52 (>= 4:0.5.1-3),
> >> libavcodec52 (<< 4:0.5.1-99) | libavcodec-extra-52 (<< 4:0.5.1-99)
> >> 
> >> If I understand this patch correctly, the ffmpeg package cannot be
> >> installed with the binary package from ffmpeg-extra.
> >> 
> >> Can you please elaborate on this change?
> > 
> > The problem is that the deb version for ffmpeg-extra might be lower than
> > the deb version for main ffmpeg packages. For instance, ffmpeg would
> > expect a version of libavcodec-extra-52 (>= 4:0.5.1-3), even though no
> > such package is available yet.
> 
> Oh I see. Yes, that's indeed a problem.
> 
> >> > diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules
> >> > index b6d2051..ca852f8 100755
> >> > --- a/debian/rules
> >> > +++ b/debian/rules
> >> > @@ -126,12 +126,13 @@ binary-arch: build install formats.txt
> >> > 
> >> >              dh_makeshlibs -p"$$pkg" -V"$$pkg (>= $(DEB_VERSION)) | 
> >> > $$upkg
> >> >              (>= $(DEB_VERSION)), $$pkg (<< 
> >> > $(EPOCH)$(UPSTREAM_VERSION)-99)
> >> >              | $$upkg (<< $(EPOCH)$(UPSTREAM_VERSION)-99)"; \
> >> >          
> >> >          done
> >> >          env
> >> >          
> >> > LD_LIBRARY_PATH="$(LD_LIBRARY_PATH):$(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr/lib" \
> >> > 
> >> > -        dh_shlibdeps
> >> > +        dh_shlibdeps -Nffmpeg
> >> > 
> >> >  # target dependencies for external packages
> >> >  
> >> >          for pkg in $(LIB_PKGS); do \
> >> >          
> >> >              upkg=$$(echo "$$pkg" | sed -r 's/([0-9]+)$$/-extra-\1/'); \
> >> >              dh_makeshlibs -p"$$pkg" -V"$$pkg (>= $(SHLIBS_VERSION)) | 
> >> > $$upkg
> >> >              (>= $(SHLIBS_VERSION))"; \
> >> >          
> >> >          done
> >> > 
> >> > +        dh_shlibdeps -pffmpeg
> >> 
> >> I guess the same could have been accomplished by putting 'ffmpeg' in the
> >> for loop like this:
> >> 
> >> for pkg in ffmpeg $(LIB_PKGS); do \
> >> ...
> >> 
> >> But as stated above, I think this is wrong. Or I misunderstood
> >> something.
> > 
> > Actually, dh_makeshlibs and dh_shlibdeps do not do the same thing, so
> > what you propose won't work. dh_shlibdeps still needs to be run for
> > ffmpeg as well. The use of running dh_shlibdeps solely for ffmpeg after
> > the creation of target dependencies for external packages was so that
> > ffmpeg could make use of the ffmpeg-extra libs, just like any other
> > external package.
> 
> Ah, now I understand the change. you want to have the ffmpeg package
> treated just like any other package in the archive that links to
> ffmpeg. This is a very valid request, and now I see that your
> implementation matches that.
> 
> I was concerned because I'm pondering about fixing bug #578500 and
> thought that your change would make creating a seperate ffplay package
> unnecessarily hard. Now I see that this is straight forward to extend.
> 
> sorry for picking so hard on you ;-)
> 
> What do you think about the ffplay package? Shall we schedule it for
> the next upload to experimental?

Sure, let's have all these new ffmpeg packages go through NEW in one go.

> I do plan to upload 4:0.6-1 to experimental as soon as ffmpeg 0.6 is
> ready, and don't really care about how long ftp-master takes to process
> it. I need to package for maverick.
> 
> We could perhaps consider creating an 'experimental' archive for
> debimedia, though.

An experimental archive would be useful for debimedia, especially for 
uploading an ffmpeg-extra-0.6 package.

-- 
Regards,
Andres Mejia

_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to