ITP: lckdo -- execute a program with a lock set
Package: wnpp Owner: "Robert S. Edmonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Severity: wishlist * Package name: lckdo Version : 0 Upstream Author : Michael Tokarev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/lckdo.c * License : public domain Programming Lang: C Description : execute a program with a lock set lckdo is a utility for controlling the invocation of another program based on a lock file. It supports both shared (read) and exclusive (write) locks and can wait for a configurable amount of time for the lock to become free. lckdo is commonly used to make automated rsync mirroring more robust. -- Robert Edmonds [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: pthread has error on Debian Etch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 01:17:23AM -0400, Mohsen Pahlevanzadeh wrote: > > My distro is Debian Etch. > kernel is 2.6.18 > I have post it to pthread mailing list,They said me that i reinstall > libc6-dev package,i reinstalled it,But i see given errors. > Please help me > Yours,Mohsen After about 1 minute of a google search for 'pthred_create example' I found this: http://www.amparo.net/ce155/thread-ex.html I was able to make your homework function using the 2 threads with about 2 minutes of effort, having never programmed using pthreads. If you want the answer, I'd be happy to email you it :-) - -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/| | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net | my NPO: cfsg.org | |join the new debian-community.org to help Debian! | -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGBf5Mv8UcC1qRZVMRApk0AJ4qgr3T5jUyt739psVxF1L0yCbr8wCfcQct o2+M004LdQ5s4e/sxv8Q/FA= =2maQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please upload freeglut 2.4.0-5.1 (i386)
Hi, freeglut 2.4.0-5.1 has been built on the i386 build daemon for a week, but has not been uploaded yet. Could you please have a look? Thanks, Aurelien -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pthread has error on Debian Etch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear all,
I wrote following code :
#include
#include
#include
int g1=0;
int g2=0;
void *task1(int *counter);
//void task2(int *counter);
void cleanup(int counter1,int counter2);
int main(int argc,char *argv[])
{
pthread_t thr1,thr2;
if ( pthread_create(&thr1,NULL,task1,(void*)g1))
{
perror("pthread_create : task1");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
/* if ((ret = pthread_create(&thr2,NULL,task2,(void *)&g2)))
{
perror("pthread_create : task2");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}*/
// pthread_join(thr2,NULL);
pthread_join(thr1,NULL);
cleanup(g1,g2);
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}//end of main program
void *task1(int *counter)
{
while(*counter < 5 ){
printf("task1 count: %d\n",*counter);
(*counter)++;
}//end of while
void cleanup(int counter1,int counter2)
{
printf("Total iterations: %d\n",counter1+counter2);
}//end of cleanup function
But i receive following error:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/test/learning/pthread$ make
gcc -c -Wall test.c -lpthread
In file included from test.c:3:
/usr/include/pthread.h:285: error: conflicting types for ‘pthread_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:152: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:286: error: conflicting types for ‘pthread_attr_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:54: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_attr_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:287: error: conflicting types for ‘pthread_key_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:82: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_key_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:289: error: conflicting types for
‘pthread_mutexattr_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:102: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_mutexattr_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:290: error: conflicting types for ‘pthread_mutex_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:95: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_mutex_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:291: error: conflicting types for
‘pthread_condattr_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:79: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_condattr_t’ was here
/usr/include/pthread.h:292: error: conflicting types for ‘pthread_cond_t’
/usr/include/bits/pthreadtypes.h:72: error: previous declaration of
‘pthread_cond_t’ was here
test.c: In function ‘main’:
test.c:13: warning: passing argument 3 of ‘pthread_create’ from
incompatible pointer type
test.c:11: warning: unused variable ‘thr2’
test.c: In function ‘task1’:
test.c:38: warning: control reaches end of non-void function
make: *** [main.o] Error 1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/test/learning/pthread$
My distro is Debian Etch.
kernel is 2.6.18
I have post it to pthread mailing list,They said me that i reinstall
libc6-dev package,i reinstalled it,But i see given errors.
Please help me
Yours,Mohsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGBgXj/ZBAvBh9bHIRAm3sAJ9ZWxRrZiVA3E8HWwKYv7YQMThF6wCeMacT
N+TbYTCRul79bi7zyHlrN0c=
=rPja
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
* Maik Merten: > gives clear semantics: It's an image. Animated GIF, anyone? > gives clear semantics: Video. Does it begin to run automatically? Can be paused? Saved? What happens if there are two videos on the same page? Are they synchronized? Which one gets to play the audio? Is there any UI around the video which takes away space? Just because something is labled as "video", it's semantics aren't suddenly clear. As for the motivation for the tag, I can only speculate. A lot of webpages nowadays use flash video with custom-written player controls, which does create problems for indexing and archival. But videos with a "Save As..." context menu aren't in the interests of the content distributors, I guess. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: belittle geology
Our Last pick Doubled in 48 hours Get in on Energy Bottom Critical C A R E New SYM-C-C-T-I Currently : 20 Cents, CHEAP!!! Easy 300% on this one in Short term This is a Real Business not a fly by night Get in Monday, Don't Regret later!! through the 2010-11 season, but the school could fire him without cause by giving -- Amaker's second year -- but the Wolverines were ineligible for the through the 2010-11 season, but the school could fire him without cause by giving the University of Michigan's associate dean of students. Martin said he had - Original Message - From: "Damon Humphrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:27 PM Subject: belittle geology Get in on Energy Bottom Critical C A R E New SYM-C-C-T-I Currently : 20 Cents, CHEAP!!! Easy 300% on this one in Short term -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: With invidious
Our Last pick Doubled in 48 hours Here's your chance Critical C A R E New Sym-CCTI Currently : 20 Cents, CHEAP!!! This could hit in short and over in the long run This is a Real Business not a fly by night Get in Monday, Don't Regret later!! Martin, a now-deceased former booster, told the federal government he lent is 46 points against Chicago on Nov. 24 while he was still with the Sixers. He in the first half one night after getting just one first-half assist against handle on any night.'' At one point, both Iverson and Anthony were 12-for-16 - Original Message - From: "ZMarguerite ECrenshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:27 PM Subject: With invidious Here's your chance Critical C A R E New Sym-CCTI Currently : 20 Cents, CHEAP!!! This could hit in short and over in the long run -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#416088: ITP: libtext-worddiff-perl -- Track changes between documents
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Nacho Barrientos Arias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: libtext-worddiff-perl Version : 0.02 Upstream Author : David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-WordDiff/ * License : Perl Programming Lang: Perl Description : Track changes between documents This module is a variation on the lovely Text::Diff module. Rather than generating traditional line-oriented diffs, however, it generates word-oriented diffs. This can be useful for tracking changes in narrative documents or documents with very long lines. To diff source code, one is still best off using Text::Diff. But if you want to see how a short story changed from one version to the next, this module will do the job very nicely. . Homepage: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-WordDiff/ -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-3-amd64 Locale: LANG=en_GB.ISO-8859-15, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.ISO-8859-15 (charmap=ISO-8859-15) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#416079: ITP: pole -- portable library for structured storage
Package: wnpp Owner: Varun Hiremath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Severity: wishlist * Package name: pole Version : 0.2 Upstream Author : Ariya Hidayat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL or Web page : http://pole.berlios.de/ * License : BSD Description : portable library for structured storage POLE is a portable C++ library to access structured storage. It is designed to be compatible with Microsoft structured storage, also sometimes known as OLE Compound Document. . Homepage: http://pole.berlios.de/ -- .''`. Varun Hiremath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :Homepage: http://varun.travisbsd.org `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: fakechroot - anyone using it, should I consider hijacking it?
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 15:51 -0400, Mark Eichin wrote:
> So:
> * does anyone else find fakechroot useful and would benefit from the
> heavily-repaired version?
I use fakechroot daily to build an installer cd distro based on debian
(of course) and I honestly couldn't live without fakeroot/fakechroot.
I start the faked-sysv daemon at script startup to keep the script
readable like so:
foutput=`faked-sysv --save-file fakechroot.save`
export FAKEROOTKEY=${foutput:*}
export export LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libfakeroot/libfakeroot-sysv.so
Then I do a bunch of filesystem and fakechroot calls in a loop, then
kill at the end:
kill ${foutput#*:}
It works perfectly at the moment so I'm not sure that I'd benefit from a
heavily repaired version, however this may change when I get to do more
with the script in the future - I really should look at the bugs I
guess. It's especially useful to me as I keep the distro in CVS and
every file has user permissions. Using root gives me headaches and makes
local backups to remote servers a real pain.
I'm glad there's someone around that won't let fakechroot die!! It's
really useful.
Cheers
Mark.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: so what can we do to voice our support? (Re: video codecs in HTML 5)
Holger Levsen schrieb: > First of all, thanks to Maik for bringing this up here! Well, I'm a user of free software so this topic is in my very interest ;) I totally missed you already brought this to the project mailing list - I fired another mail to debian-project before noticing that. Sorry for the spam. I propose moving the whole discussion to debian-project as it's really mostly a political thing (beh, patents over and over again) and not so much a technical thing developers are interested in. > So despite the technical and philosophical details whether we should ignore > patents or whatnot, what can we do to voice our support for a standard with > mandates free codecs instead of propietary ones? (Which IMO is quite > obvious.) > > So how can Debian make an official statement? Do we have to wait until the > end > of the DPL elections? (April 8th) > > Maik, whats the timeline in this discussion? I'm not aware of any deadline up until a set of formats has to be chosen. I think there's room for action until the WHATWG 1.0 spec is "final" - no idea when that'll happen. I think a sensible goal would be to just defend the current wording of the WHATWG working draft, which happens to elevate the free Ogg codecs to a "SHOULD be supported" state. It has been proposed to REQUIRE browsers to support those formats, but that has no real chance of happening because the WHATWG is also targeted at platforms that may not happen to be able to support the Ogg codecs (or any other multimedia format). SHOULD is as good as it'll ever get IMO. So what has to be done to preserve the current wording? Somehow Apple needs to be convinced that it's acceptable for them to no demand to kill it. They are part of the MPEG industry and their motivation seems to be clear: They obviously may want to feed their own horse. Simply overrunning the whatwg list with well-spirited, but unofficial postings may be ineffective (they may simply stop listening). What we need is an official and polite inquiry that sheds some light onto the position of the free software world - and that would be (amongst other things) "We want to stay free and we want our citizens to be first class citizens on the web". (If someone knows a good contact to the FSF: They may be interested to see free formats getting more widely deployed, too.) > And hmm, unfortunatly WHATWG is not affiliated with W3C, which as a nice > patent policy... :-( But we can use this as another argument :) See > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/ - summary at > http://www.w3.org/2004/02/05-patentsummary.html I think the WHATWG proposal have a good chance of becoming "official" W3C standards over time. Maik Merten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: fakechroot - anyone using it, should I consider hijacking it?
fakechroot is a great idea for reducing the privileges needed for pbuilder builds, and thus simplifying developer builds of packages. However, if you look at the current bug set, it turns out that there are half dozen bugs that actually get in the way of using it for that purpose (there are another half dozen that I found by inspection but haven't come up with tests for or evidence of actual impact on builds, whereas everything currently filed in the BTS gets in the way of specific actual usage.) In the month since I started working with it, I haven't heard anything from the author/maintainer (apparently they're the same, Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.) It looks like he's been doing some things with other packages as recently as the end of 2006, though he hasn't touched this particular one since 2005 - so he's not actually MIA in general, just in regard to the package *I* care about :-) The changes seem a bit dramatic for an NMU (touching many functions, several macros that are broadly used, adding new environment variables) and it's made more complicated by him apparently being the upstream as well. So: * does anyone else find fakechroot useful and would benefit from the heavily-repaired version? * anyone know him, and can perhaps find out what's up? * since he's upstream, does it make more sense to fork and package that? (on technical grounds, it clearly doesn't, but...) * should I just be patient and wait and see? (I've got my own build, after all, and this is too late for etch anyhow...) Hey, there. I just joined the debian-devel mailing list for the express purpose of cheering you on in this task. I just recently replaced a fairly ugly LiveCD build process that required a number of privileged operations (mounting an ext2 image, chrooting to modify installed packages in the work-in-progress root, etc.) with one which can be run entirely as a normal user. fakechroot was integral to making this happen. I'd be thrilled to see fakechroot frilled out and patched up, myself. If you're so inclined, please do patch it up. I can say that I'll get thorough use out of it, anyway. :) Cheers, and thanks! Zachary Palmer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
so what can we do to voice our support? (Re: video codecs in HTML 5)
Hi, added -project to to: as its more appropriate there :) On Friday 23 March 2007 18:26, Steve Greenland wrote: > That's all true, but if the standard requires (or recommends) MPEG4 > support, then that's what everyone will use, and we'll be screwed, > again. If we (the Free Software community) can get Ogg-Theora listed as > the base requirement (or recommendation), then we have a small chance of > promoting a free codec for widespread use. First of all, thanks to Maik for bringing this up here! So despite the technical and philosophical details whether we should ignore patents or whatnot, what can we do to voice our support for a standard with mandates free codecs instead of propietary ones? (Which IMO is quite obvious.) So how can Debian make an official statement? Do we have to wait until the end of the DPL elections? (April 8th) Maik, whats the timeline in this discussion? And hmm, unfortunatly WHATWG is not affiliated with W3C, which as a nice patent policy... :-( But we can use this as another argument :) See http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/ - summary at http://www.w3.org/2004/02/05-patentsummary.html regards, Holger pgpH4x1wTxwOR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: release update: d-i schedule, release notes, deep freeze
Hi, On Friday 23 March 2007 13:54, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > We still have no usable linux-source deb. The prepatched source > currently shipped will not build vserver, xen and several archs and > the debian patch is not compatible to make-kpkg and it is undocumented > how to apply it manualy to get the per arch or per flavour parts of > the patch. > > Imho that makes the source package unusable. A bug about this is in > the BTS since forever. #? regards, Holger pgp2BbxLXoPhE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
Sam Morris schrieb: > I thought that HTML was going in the other direction--deprecating > in favour of the already-existing and perfectly logical . > > I really can't see what the point of this tag is in the first > place. Over at WHATWG it seems most people thinkg is badly broken in basically all implementations and that it's giving poor semantics anyway. If you find an in your DOM you know basically nothing about the nature of it. It could be an image, video, audio or even text. As such it doesn't help to structure the document into semantic units ( vs. and // etc. vs. CSS styling). gives clear semantics: It's an image. gives clear semantics: Video. well, you can extrapolate ;) So the current trend seems to move away from using as a media kitchen sink as it degrades HTML to simply being a thing to glue other things on without giving an easy overview of what has been put onto the page. Maik Merten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 01:39:34PM +, Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 14:26 +0100, Maik Merten wrote: > > Martijn van Oosterhout schrieb: > > > Sorry, this doesn't follow. Calling the tag is completely > > > orthoginal to whether it's implemented by a plugin or not. To support > > > it all Firefox et al would need to do is convert it to the equivalent > > > tag or whatever internally... > > > > The tag is supposed to offer "first class" support for video > > content just like usually supports JPEG and GIF in a way so > > content providers can rely on it. > > > > To the end user it shouldn't matter if is transformed to > > on-the-fly. > > I thought that HTML was going in the other direction--deprecating > in favour of the already-existing and perfectly logical . > > I really can't see what the point of this tag is in the first > place. I have not followed the latest evolutions of the thing, but the deprecation of in favour of may have been an xhtml2 goal, while might be an html5 thingy... Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 14:26 +0100, Maik Merten wrote: > Martijn van Oosterhout schrieb: > > Sorry, this doesn't follow. Calling the tag is completely > > orthoginal to whether it's implemented by a plugin or not. To support > > it all Firefox et al would need to do is convert it to the equivalent > > tag or whatever internally... > > The tag is supposed to offer "first class" support for video > content just like usually supports JPEG and GIF in a way so > content providers can rely on it. > > To the end user it shouldn't matter if is transformed to > on-the-fly. I thought that HTML was going in the other direction--deprecating in favour of the already-existing and perfectly logical . I really can't see what the point of this tag is in the first place. -- Sam Morris http://robots.org.uk/ PGP key id 1024D/5EA01078 3412 EA18 1277 354B 991B C869 B219 7FDB 5EA0 1078 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
Martijn van Oosterhout schrieb: > Sorry, this doesn't follow. Calling the tag is completely > orthoginal to whether it's implemented by a plugin or not. To support > it all Firefox et al would need to do is convert it to the equivalent > tag or whatever internally... The tag is supposed to offer "first class" support for video content just like usually supports JPEG and GIF in a way so content providers can rely on it. To the end user it shouldn't matter if is transformed to on-the-fly. > Most (all?) program that manipulate video/audio data do so via > plugins. That's because it's easier that way than trying to build > support for every odd format someone might want to use into your > binary... Albeit the functionality may be implemented using a plugin the talk over at WHATWG is about "native" support for video. That means that browser packages have to come with at least one codec (no matter if it's hardwired into the browser itself or seperated into an external module). This doesn't change the possibilty that if Mozilla ends up supporting a non-free format in their official builds Debian may not be able to ship a browser offering the same feature set, leaving Debian users in the dust when it comes to "first class" web video. Maik Merten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
On 3/24/07, Maik Merten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Taken that e.g. Mozilla and the KHTML team aren't able to build browsers with integrated (that's what is for: Video without plugins) MPEG4 support without the appended patent licenses restricting the freedom of distribution it's worth to try to get a free format into as many browsers as possible. Sorry, this doesn't follow. Calling the tag is completely orthoginal to whether it's implemented by a plugin or not. To support it all Firefox et al would need to do is convert it to the equivalent tag or whatever internally... Most (all?) program that manipulate video/audio data do so via plugins. That's because it's easier that way than trying to build support for every odd format someone might want to use into your binary... No matter what: Having Mozilla and Opera support a free format is good in any case. If something proprietary gets recommended Debian can only lose. If a free format is in place Debian users can at least watch parts of the content no matter what Microsoft does. Ofcourse, it'd be good for people to be able to ship a standards compliant browser without shipping non-free components, but that has nothing to do with whether it's a plugin or not... Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
Sam Morris schrieb: > It's probably more accurate to say that no matter what the standard says, > Microsoft will ignore it and only implement Windows Media formats, which > everyone will use, and we'll be screwed. :( Microsoft is not part of WHATWG. Having a free video format in browsers like Firefox and Opera (or Safari, if that's what you like) is a good thing no matter what. Once Microsoft implements (that may take a long time, they're not really fast adopting new standards that are not their own) there may be enough content out there to make them look not so clever if they don't support the baseline format that is long since in use (well, that didn't stop Microsoft in the past, though) Anyway, even if Microsoft joins the party with "Windows Media only" the free software community has a common interchange format in place for their own web-video needs (how many of you use the Microsoft Internet Explorer?). Taken that e.g. Mozilla and the KHTML team aren't able to build browsers with integrated (that's what is for: Video without plugins) MPEG4 support without the appended patent licenses restricting the freedom of distribution it's worth to try to get a free format into as many browsers as possible. Here in Germany (according to what stats you trust) the Mozilla based browsers have a market share beyond 30%. If Mozilla happens to support a free format but Microsoft decides to use Windows Media content providers most likely need to provide a free codec version of their content anyway - and that'd mean Debian users can enjoy at least some of the content. No matter what: Having Mozilla and Opera support a free format is good in any case. If something proprietary gets recommended Debian can only lose. If a free format is in place Debian users can at least watch parts of the content no matter what Microsoft does. Maik Merten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: video codecs in HTML 5
Andrew Donnellan schrieb:
> But are the MPEG patentors *likely* to sue Debian?
>
> If Debian was sued over the MPEG patents, imagine what Slashdot and
> Digg would do to them - it wouldn't be great PR.
In case of MP3 one of the patent holders *did* take action against
"free" MP3 encoders (the Fraunhofer institute did send a lot of nasty
letters).
Personally I think the question is: Do you want to live on a minefield?
There may be companies out there that love pointing out that "Linux does
not respect interlectual property" - and they may lobby a patent
infringement lawsuit. In any case the free software community has more
to loose (credibility) than a suing patent holder ("well, who cares for
Slashdot if money can be made?").
As long as this mad patent system is active the free software community
should make as little obvious licensing mistakes as possible. Using MPEG
technology without paying fees is something pretty obvious, I'd say.
Maik Merten
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
