On 13/07/10 08:40, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 02:49:15 (EDT), Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> 
>>    Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:28:59 +0200, Benjamin Drung <bdr...@ubuntu.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I doubt that we can pull a new upstream version into a stable Ubuntu
>>> release (e.g. vlc 1.1.0 in Ubuntu 10.04), because the new version breaks
>>> the ABI of the older version and therefore break applications that uses
>>> libvlc.
>>
>> Not true for 9.10 which ships 1.0.2, while 1.0.6 has no known security
>> issues.
> 
> So let's check:
> 
> | vlc | 0.8.6.release.e+x264svn20071224+faad2.6.1-0ubuntu3.3 | 
> hardy-updates/universe | source
> | vlc | 0.9.9a-2ubuntu1 | jaunty/multiverse | source, amd64, i386
> | vlc | 1.0.2-1ubuntu2 | karmic/universe | source, amd64, i386
> | vlc | 1.0.2-1ubuntu2.1 | karmic-updates/universe | source, amd64, i386
> | vlc | 1.0.6-1ubuntu1 | lucid/universe | source, amd64, i386
> | vlc | 1.0.6-1ubuntu1.1 | lucid-updates/universe | source, amd64, i386
> | vlc | 1.1.0-2ubuntu1 | maverick/universe | source, amd64, i386
> 
> so in hardy we have basically the same situation as in
> debian/stable. We could argue that it is unsupportable and try to get it
> removed.

% apt-cache rdepends libvlc2
libvlc2
Reverse Depends:
  vlc-nox
  mozilla-plugin-vlc
  libvlc-dev
% apt-cache showsrc vlc-nox libvlc-dev mozilla-plugin-vlc| \
    grep Package: | uniq
Package: vlc


So the ABI issue is a non-issue, since nobody uses libvlc outside of vlc
itself.

But I do agree that the stable update process can be too strict.
Alternatives include backports or moving vlc to volatile (for debian at
least).



-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
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