Bug#729203: Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian
Hi Everyone, Just wanted to let you know, I'm still working on my ppa (I'm still trying to fund the test bench). As well, there is a discussion on Ubuntu forums; http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2149564p=13100237#post13100237 . From My Research Desk :) On 08/09/2014 08:27 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: Hi Jonas, On 09.08.2014 13:51, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Quoting Andreas Cadhalpun (2014-08-09 13:34:04) On 09.08.2014 11:45, Charles Plessy wrote: I searched for license information missing from your debian/copyright and could find only one case, libavutil/x86/x86inc.asm, which is under the ISC license. The debian/copyright file of your package looks comprehensive to me. Many thanks for the copyright review. (I know it is a lot of work.) I added the missing information you found (and also uppercased some license names to match the copyright format specification) [1]. It's probably not necessary to make a new upload to the NEW queue for this change. In the repository is a new upstream version anyway and it will be uploaded, once the current version gets accepted. In my experience you need not wait for ftpmaster approval to issue subsequent releases: When approving, they will simply approve the subsequent releases as well. If you don't release updates, you may risk that when ftpmaster finds time to inspect your package they find flaws (which you knew about and had prepared fixes for but did not in fact formally provide) - and you get the package rejected and need to wait for _next_ window that they find time to inspect it anew. Thanks for warning me, as that would indeed be unfortunate, so I'm going to ask my sponsor to make a new upload. Best regards, Andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53efb178.7000...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Rebuild of possible FFmpeg reverse build-dependenciesa
From My Research Desk :)
On 05/06/2014 12:28 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
Hi,
On 04.05.2014 22:16, Cyborg Ethly Alpha {My Research Desk} wrote:
On one system, I have FFmpeg 2.x is installed side by side with Libav ;
The package listing from Synaptic shows;
libavcodec-extra-52
This is from version 0.5...
libavcodec-extra-53
...and this from version 0.8.
libavcodec55-ffmpeg
all installed.
If you want to compare FFmpeg with Libav, it would be better to
compare FFmpeg 2.2 with Libav 10 (currently in Debian/experimental),
as they are approximately from the same time. Otherwise the comparison
won't be fair.
To start, I'm going to stick with the compile instructions from FFmpeg
(that includes compiling all dependencies). Once I'm comfortable with
that, I'm going to add two more systems to the network so I can test,
deb packaging different install configurations.
and I found;
ffmpeg-set-alternatives
A helper package to create and remove the alternatives for the ffmpeg.
The Debian alternatives system (man update-alternatives):
It is possible for several programs fulfilling the same or similar
functions
to be installed on a single system at the same time. For example,
many systems have several text editors installed at once. This gives
choice to the
users of a system, allowing each to use a different editor, if desired,
but makes it difficult for a program to make a good choice for an
editor
to invoke if the user has not specified a particular preference.
Debian's alternatives system aims to solve this problem.
As far as I can tell, ffmpeg-set-alternatives is meant for the
binaries ffmpeg, ffplay etc., because older versions of Libav created
them.
Newer versions of Libav use avconv, avplay etc., so this package is
not needed anymore.
The FFmpeg install is direct from the FFmpeg.org sute.
I'm replacing the network router this week. The week after, I plan to do
some screencasts on the system with FFmpeg 2.2 .
After that I need add two systems to the test bench to practice creating
deb files, and test them.
Once the deb file(s) are successfully tested, they will be uploaded to
the ppa.
I see.
All my systems are Kubuntu 13.10 . I use [synaptic] and [apt] removing
muon, pulseaudio disabling [desktop effects]
Is there a particular reason why you don't upgrade to Kubuntu 14.04?
I used refurbished equipment, particularly laptops and netbooks (~ $200
per system). I have found (through experience) that it's best to wait
between 6 to 9 months before upgrading. Upgrading to x.04 (or x.10) on
04 (or 10) causes fatal errors that are not recoverable. You have to
wipe the system and do a clean install. By waiting, even if the upgrade
creates fatal errors (as 13.10 did) they are command line recoverable.
This is why on Kubuntu Muon is removed, and Synaptic Apt are used.
Muon (kde) brings the whole system down. I've also disabled desktop
effects because it cause system stability issues that does affect video
stability. Pulseaudio is also removed. I find studio equipment (mixers,
midi, etc) work better without it.
If you watch the development of my youtube channel (an OpenIPTV channel)
http://youtube.com/CyborgAlphaV1 , you can see a IPTV channel built (and
run) solely on Linux and using FFmpeg Kdnelive.
Best regards,
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53698e2d.6010...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Rebuild of possible FFmpeg reverse build-dependenciesa
Hi Everyone, On one system, I have FFmpeg 2.x is installed side by side with Libav ; The package listing from Synaptic shows; libavcodec-extra-52 libavcodec-extra-53 libavcodec55-ffmpeg all installed. and I found; ffmpeg-set-alternatives A helper package to create and remove the alternatives for the ffmpeg. The Debian alternatives system (man update-alternatives): It is possible for several programs fulfilling the same or similar functions to be installed on a single system at the same time. For example, many systems have several text editors installed at once. This gives choice to the users of a system, allowing each to use a different editor, if desired, but makes it difficult for a program to make a good choice for an editor to invoke if the user has not specified a particular preference. Debian's alternatives system aims to solve this problem. The FFmpeg install is direct from the FFmpeg.org sute. I'm replacing the network router this week. The week after, I plan to do some screencasts on the system with FFmpeg 2.2 . After that I need add two systems to the test bench to practice creating deb files, and test them. Once the deb file(s) are successfully tested, they will be uploaded to the ppa. All my systems are Kubuntu 13.10 . I use [synaptic] and [apt] removing muon, pulseaudio disabling [desktop effects] From My Research Desk :) On 05/04/2014 08:20 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: Hi Niv, On 04.05.2014 13:03, Niv Sardi wrote: I haven't gotten the time to look more into this, and am now in a 25hrs bus with limited internet access. I see. My rationale is this: - I don't want to ofend the libav maintainers nor want them to go on a +300 api bump. I don't want to offend them as well, but I don't see, why they should have to make any API bump. - I don't want anything breaking in debian because users pick our lib on a package that was meant to link to libav and somehow breaks. To prevent this, FFmpeg is compiled with the --enable-raise-major option, so that the FFmpeg SONAME is increased by 100. So no package that does not depend on the FFmpeg libraries will use them. (Except maybe, if you still use that library in 100 years, which I don't think anyone will do.) If we keep the names as they are, on next dist-upgrade everybody depending on libavblah will pull it. If we want that, we should go tech ctte and take over Libav, but that wasn't the consensus. No, a dist-upgrade will not upgrade libavcodec54 to libavcodec155, it will only install libavcodec155, if any package depends on it and only remove libavcodec54, if no package depends on it anymore. And there is no problem at all, if libavcodec54 and libavcodec155 are installed in parallel, because the SONAME is different. I wanted to see if we had an easy way to alter the soname so this lib is seen as an alternative to the other one and if we can keep packaging in line with policy. In the defect of such possibility, I feel we should rename to libavblah-ffmpegSoname. I think the easy way you are looking for is --enable-raise-major and this is already used. And changing the name of the library will not change much, as these libraries usually only get installed as dependencies, so the user will not see the name. As this package would still include libavcodec.so.155, it will have the same (theoretical) problems in 100 years, when the Libav libavcodec SONAME reaches 155. So I have the feeling that here is kind of a misunderstanding about the effect of changing the package name. To be perfectly clear: libavcodec155 from FFmepg and libavcodec54 from Libav are co-installable and work fine, if both are installed. You can try this, by installing the ffmpeg package and the needed libraries. This will not break any existing installed program. Best regards, Andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5366a03b.9020...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: FFmpeg Experimental Nightly in LaunchPad
Hi, I've begun the work on FFmpeg 2.x in Lauchpad; Project page; https://launchpad.net/ffmpeg-exp-nightly PPA; https://launchpad.net/~cyborg-alpha-nh4/+archive/ffmpeg-exp-nightly I tried to set-up in https://alioth.debian.org , but received the following error on verify; Exiting with error --- Could Not Get User -- From My Research Desk :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/535e6ca7.2090...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Rebuild of possible FFmpeg reverse build-dependenciesa
From My Research Desk :)
On 04/28/2014 05:26 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
Hi,
On 28.04.2014 03:17, Cyborg Ethly Alpha {My Research Desk} wrote:
I've been watching the discussion. I'll be test benching the differences
with FFmpeg and Libav (on the same system) through-out the year.
That's interesting. How do you intend to benchmark this?
Do you want to test the command-line utilities, or compile all
reverse-dependencies of src:libav against FFmpeg, or something else?
I've complied the whole thing, and is running on a system side-by-side
with Libav. I intend over the next few months to add two to three more
systems, to test both nightly stable, side-by-side with Libav.
I will
be setting up the experimental (nightly) FFmpeg ppa in launch pad some
time tonight (it's 9pm EST here) or tomorrow. Then I'll add an
experimental (stable).
I couldn't find any packages in your PPA [1]. Should there be any, or
didn't you add them yet?
Nothing there yet, just getting started on Launchpad [2] [3]
If Debian, and all other derivatives, intend to
stay a Linux OS, then there should be a solution for FFmpeg Libav to
co-exist. I've done this with Gnome and KDE - I have a hybridized
desktop. I don't expect Debian or Canonical to do this. I expect it to
be purely a community/individual effort. If a Linux OS is truly Linux,
then it must be highly customizable.
This is what I'm working for.
So, I think we are on the same page, along with many others. (from
various forum comments calling for the return of FFmpeg).
Best regards,
Andreas
1: https://launchpad.net/~cyborg-alpha-nh4/+archive/ffmpeg-exp-nightly
On Lauchpad;
2: https://launchpad.net/ffmpeg-exp-nightly
3: https://launchpad.net/~cyborg-alpha-nh4/+archive/ffmpeg-exp-nightly
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/535ef0d1.5070...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Rebuild of possible FFmpeg reverse build-dependenciesa
I'm compiling direct from FFmpeg. This what's on my current system.
(FFmpeg 2.2 LibAV side-by-side) . FFmpeg (with libav dependencies) was
compiled from their nightly tar ball. I'm going to experiment with that
first, before moving on to working on the stable version. (Simply since
I started with it first -- and it's working on Kubuntu 13.10)
As stated, on the page, I'm just getting started. Just getting set-up.
Once, underway -- I will add in the FFmpeg license, and other licenses
as (if) needed.
The new license, FSL, should be ready for presentation in about a month.
The first goal is to get a ffmpeg2xx.deb uploaded to the ppa. (Mind you,
I said goal -- not something I've achieved) I still need to add another
2 systems to my test bench, before this happens. This will allow me to
test the install and uninstall of the deb package, before I upload it to
the ppa.
From My Research Desk :)
On 04/28/2014 11:42 PM, Timothy Gu wrote:
On Apr 28, 2014 5:22 PM, Cyborg Ethly Alpha {My Research Desk}
cyborg.alpha.ch3...@gmail.com wrote:
On Lauchpad;
2: https://launchpad.net/ffmpeg-exp-nightly
The page says:
Licences: Creative Commons - No Rights Reserved, Other/Open Source
(A new license is being created FSL (FreeSpeechLicense) based on the
principles of GNU, OpenSource Free Speech.)
Huh? The Debian collab-maint ffmpeg package is GPL 2.0.
Timothy
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/535f2b2a.5010...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Rebuild of possible FFmpeg reverse build-dependenciesa
I've been watching the discussion. I'll be test benching the differences
with FFmpeg and Libav (on the same system) through-out the year. I will
be setting up the experimental (nightly) FFmpeg ppa in launch pad some
time tonight (it's 9pm EST here) or tomorrow. Then I'll add an
experimental (stable). If Debian, and all other derivatives, intend to
stay a Linux OS, then there should be a solution for FFmpeg Libav to
co-exist. I've done this with Gnome and KDE - I have a hybridized
desktop. I don't expect Debian or Canonical to do this. I expect it to
be purely a community/individual effort. If a Linux OS is truly Linux,
then it must be highly customizable.
From My Research Desk :)
On 04/27/2014 04:06 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
Hi Niv,
thanks for reviewing.
On 27.04.2014 21:24, Niv Sardi wrote:
I took a little bit of time to review your packages today,
you overhall did a really good job, and your efforts to bring FFMPEG
into debian are very apreciated
that said, here are a couple of things I think we need to fix before
upload, but mainly:
* the libav{codec,device,format,...} packages seem to be conflicting
with the libav ones.
right now we have libavcodec53 in debian, if we are going to make a
libavcodec155 then in 100 libav version we're going to have a hard
problem to deal with.
Libav makes a new release about once per year.
So even if every time the SONAME of libavcodec increases, they will
get to 155 in about 100 years...
While I sincerely hope that Debian still exists in 100 years, I think
this is a mostly theoretical problem, because I doubt that it will be
a problem to reuse a package name that had been used 100 years earlier.
I thought you wanted to package like the -dev ackage into
libavcodec-ffmpegxx
(The development packages are different, because Libav already uses
the name libavcodec-dev.)
if we're going to aim into having both libav and ffmpeg, we should be
good citizen to each other.
As I don't think that's a problem, I prefer to follow policy [1]:
Normally, the run-time shared library and its SONAME symlink should
be placed in a package named librarynamesoversion, where soversion is
the version number in the SONAME of the shared library.
But if you still think, it would be better to call them *-ffmpegNNN, I
could live with that.
Best regards,
Andreas
1:
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-sharedlibs-runtime
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/535dac20.1060...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Bug#728772: closed by Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org (Bug#732159: Removed package(s) from unstable)
I'm in the middle of clearing up some network issues (on my network).
I've complied ffmpeg on the Debian fork Ubuntu, and have an account on
launchpad. I'm aiming to bring FFmpeg there.
From My Research Desk :)
On 04/23/2014 03:58 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
On 21.04.2014 12:42, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Debian Bug Tracking System dixit:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
which was filed against the src:mplayer package:
#728772: mplayer: FTBFS: The architecture of your CPU (UNKNOWN) is
not supported
It has been closed by Debian FTP Masters
ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org.
[…]
as the package mplayer has just been removed from the Debian archive
[…]
* *** *** *
** * **** ** *
*
** * * * *** ** ** ***
** ***
** ** * ** ** ** ** ***
** ***
* *** * ** **
** ***
** ** * ** ** ***
** ***
** ** * ** ** * **** *** ***
*****
** ** * ** *** *** * **
** ***
** ** * ** ** ** **** ****
***
** ** * ** ** ** **** **
** ** * ** ** ** **** *****
** * * * ** ** **** ****
*** *** * ** ** **** **
** ** * ** **
**** *** **
*
*
*
*
You cannot s̲e̲r̲i̲o̲u̲s̲l̲y̲ remove mplayer from the archive?
You must be kidding. MPlayer2 was born dead and VLC
just doesn’t work most of the time and has a horrible UI.
Honestly, please bring mplayer+ffmpeg back!
We are already working on this, see the FFmpeg ITP [1].
I think Alexander Strasser managed to build a recent mplayer with
these FFmpeg packages.
You're welcome to join the team and help getting FFmpeg uploaded to
the archive. There is already a collab-maint repository [2].
Best regards,
Andreas
1: https://bugs.debian.org/729203
2: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/ffmpeg.git;a=summary
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53582bdb.5070...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Intent to package FFmpeg
Hi Andreas
Thank you very much. I was thinking, that it might be a good idea to
have a second (back) repository, just in case. It would relieve pressure
on the primary repository and provide better up-time. While I currently
don't have a git server (and I would be willing to set one up). I do
have a launchpad account. [ https://launchpad.net/~cyborg-alpha-nh4 ] We
could provide source and binary packages from there - just as sunab ppa
(Olivier Banus) did for Kdenlive. I believe, I would set up an FFmpeg
project (under my ppa), and create a team (providing upload access). At
this point, we would not be building source - just providing a place to
serve it from.
I have successfully build FFmpeg [ /ffmpeg version 2.2.git Copyright (c)
2000-2014 the FFmpeg developers//
// built on Mar 13 2014 16:08:45 with gcc 4.8 (Ubuntu/Linaro
4.8.1-10ubuntu9) /] on Kubuntu 13.10 . However, there appears to be a
bug, that I'm trying to resolve.
[ ffmpeg -f alsa -ac 2 -i hw:2,0 -f x11grab -r 30 -s 1920x1080 -i :0.0
-acodec libmp3lame -ab 320k
/media/[username]/library-portable/video-studio/transfer-bin/BTSvlog03.avi ]
produces the error
[ [swscaler @ 0x9e81080] Warning: data is not aligned! This can lead to
a speedloss ]
Hope I can be of use.
Daniel
From My Research Desk :)
On 03/22/2014 08:21 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
Hi Daniel
On 21.03.2014 22:06, Cyborg Ethly Alpha {My Research Desk} wrote:
I'm interested in becoming a co-maintainer.
You are welcome to do so.
There is already a collab-maint git repository on alioth [1], but
unfortunately some permissions are wrong, so I can't push my packaging
to it. I hope one of the alioth maintainers will get around to fix this.
Best regards,
Andreas
1: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/ffmpeg.git;a=summary
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/532def97.90...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: Intent to package FFmpeg
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=729203#588 I intend to be in the packaging team and Alexander Strasser as well. Other co-maintainers are still welcome. I'm interested in becoming a co-maintainer. Daniel (aka Cyborg Alpha) -- From My Research Desk :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/532ca9c5.6060...@gmail.com
Bug#729203: We need a real FFMPEG
We need a real FFMPEG , the new one produces *** THIS PROGRAM IS DEPRECATED *** This program is only provided for compatibility and will be removed in a future release. Please use avconv instead. after issuing an ffmpeg command. This cause ffmpeg to go into permanent disk-sleep, requiring a re-boot to resolve it. Kill, does not kill ffmpeg (with the new message) only a reboot does. Bring back the real FFMPEG. -- From My Research Desk :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5321fea9.4070...@gmail.com
