Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: From the email [1] on the VLC list I had the impression that libpostproc is broken. That is my understanding as well. That's why I wanted to hear from you XBMC needs libpostproc for. Did you notice any visual improvements from enabling the libpostproc filter in XBMC? If it is working fine I don't see why it should be dropped and I'll keep libpostproc support in XBMC, too. Well I kept it around to not break the compilation of existing programs. And that part seems to be ok-ish. I have looked into the source more closely and it seems using a very hidden setting XBMC users can pass postproc filters to libpostproc thus I can't replace it with vf_yadif. vf_yadif is certainly no drop-in replacement, as it has a totally different API. This replacement may require significant knowledge of the codebase. So if libpostproc will stay with us could you please upload it to wheezy-backports to let me upload xbmc, too? Is this really necessary? What's the problem with the libpostproc-dev package provided by libav 0.8 in stable? http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libpostproc-dev Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
2014/1/12 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: From the email [1] on the VLC list I had the impression that libpostproc is broken. That is my understanding as well. That's why I wanted to hear from you XBMC needs libpostproc for. Did you notice any visual improvements from enabling the libpostproc filter in XBMC? Now I have tried it and the results look pretty good on Jessie. The postprocessing option is visible when playing the video. Please keep the package and I think this bug could be closed. Maybe #729332 could be fixed as well. ;-) If it is working fine I don't see why it should be dropped and I'll keep libpostproc support in XBMC, too. Well I kept it around to not break the compilation of existing programs. And that part seems to be ok-ish. I have looked into the source more closely and it seems using a very hidden setting XBMC users can pass postproc filters to libpostproc thus I can't replace it with vf_yadif. vf_yadif is certainly no drop-in replacement, as it has a totally different API. This replacement may require significant knowledge of the codebase. So if libpostproc will stay with us could you please upload it to wheezy-backports to let me upload xbmc, too? Is this really necessary? What's the problem with the libpostproc-dev package provided by libav 0.8 in stable? http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libpostproc-dev It depends on libavutil-dev, but XBMC needs newer libavutil-dev: $ sudo apt-get install libpostproc-dev Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libpostproc-dev : Depends: libavutil-dev (= 6:0.8.9-1) but 6:9.10-1~bpo70+1 is to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. Cheers, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: 2014/1/12 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: From the email [1] on the VLC list I had the impression that libpostproc is broken. That is my understanding as well. That's why I wanted to hear from you XBMC needs libpostproc for. Did you notice any visual improvements from enabling the libpostproc filter in XBMC? Now I have tried it and the results look pretty good on Jessie. The postprocessing option is visible when playing the video. Please keep the package and I think this bug could be closed. Maybe #729332 could be fixed as well. ;-) Oh, indeed, I'll have a look at that shortly. So if libpostproc will stay with us could you please upload it to wheezy-backports to let me upload xbmc, too? Is this really necessary? What's the problem with the libpostproc-dev package provided by libav 0.8 in stable? http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libpostproc-dev It depends on libavutil-dev, but XBMC needs newer libavutil-dev: $ sudo apt-get install libpostproc-dev Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libpostproc-dev : Depends: libavutil-dev (= 6:0.8.9-1) but 6:9.10-1~bpo70+1 is to be installed E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. Oh I see. The dependencies are overly strict in stable. Well, since fixing the dependencies in stable is hard and takes lots of time, I guess you're right and we should have a backported libpostproc in stable. I'll have a look at that. Thanks for your help identifying the problem and working on the xbmc backport! -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
Am Sonntag, den 12.01.2014, 15:14 -0500 schrieb Reinhard Tartler: Oh I see. The dependencies are overly strict in stable. That may be true, but on the other hand we do not get any bug reports where dmo packaged caused breakage from stable. I am inclined to add back the strict dependencies in the last upload before the freeze. - Fabian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
Hi Reinhard, On 03/11/2013 06:15 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: Package: libpostproc As VLC upstream points out in http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2013-March/092249.html: http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2013-March/092249.html The package is provided as a transitional measure until all reverse dependencies have been changed to no longer need it. After this has been implemented in all packages in the debian archive, this bug should be repurposed to track the phasing out of libpostproc of the archive. Does that still stand? I saw several uploads to this package since opening this bug. If if still stands do you have some suggestions for libpostproc replacements which other packages should transition to? Cheers, Balint signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
I would suggest libavfilter. What do you need libpostproc for exactly? -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
2014/1/11 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com: I would suggest libavfilter. What do you need libpostproc for exactly? It is used for deinterlacing DVD videos in XBMC. I just started to maintain XBMC and noticed that libpostproc is not in stable thus back-porting XBMC to Wheezy needs a back-ported libpostproc or XBMC should be migrated to something else. Maybe opening bugs against packages using libpostproc would make other maintainers start migrating their packages to libavfilter. Thanks, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
For deinterlacing, have you looked at vf_yadif, (part of libavfilter)? That would give you much better deinterlacing results anyways. Regarding filing bugs, you may be right. Do you have some spare cycles and would be willing to start filing the bugs? OTOH, I'm not sure if that's strictly necessary, because packages depending on this won't migrate to testing, as you mentioned earlier. Maybe a lintian warning would be more helpful, such as seen in #730714. I did not push very hard on this issue because I wanted to see if there would be any upstream activity and it would make sense to keep libpostproc anyways. It turns out that the upstream repository http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git didn't see real functional development that aren't build fixes for years. Moreover, nobody stepped up to take over the package. Now 1.5y later, it may be a good time to phase libpostproc out of debian for good. Best, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
2014/1/11 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com: For deinterlacing, have you looked at vf_yadif, (part of libavfilter)? That would give you much better deinterlacing results anyways. No I haven't, but I will. Thanks. Regarding filing bugs, you may be right. Do you have some spare cycles and would be willing to start filing the bugs? OTOH, I'm not sure if that's strictly necessary, because packages depending on this won't migrate to testing, as you mentioned earlier. Maybe a lintian warning would be more helpful, such as seen in #730714. Sure, I can file the bugs in a few days. I think filing bugs is the best way of starting the removal of libpostproc. There are only a few packages depending on it, thus adding a linitian warning may be overkill: $ apt-cache rdepends libpostproc52 libpostproc52 Reverse Depends: libxine2-ffmpeg libxine1-ffmpeg xbmc-bin vlc-nox transcode mpv mplayer2 mplayer-gui mplayer mencoder libpostproc-dev gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg libgmerlin-avdec1 ffmpeg2theora Regarding the migration libpostproc is missing only from stable, it is present in testing thus every package using it can still migrate and I think it is OK. I did not push very hard on this issue because I wanted to see if there would be any upstream activity and it would make sense to keep libpostproc anyways. It turns out that the upstream repository http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git didn't see real functional development that aren't build fixes for years. Moreover, nobody stepped up to take over the package. Now 1.5y later, it may be a good time to phase libpostproc out of debian for good. I think we should discuss the mass bug filing on debian-devel in advance, but otherwise I'm OK with the removal. Would you like to announce the removal? I will migrate XBMC to libavfilter when I can find some time for that. Cheers, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: I think filing bugs is the best way of starting the removal of libpostproc. There are only a few packages depending on it, thus adding a linitian warning may be overkill: $ apt-cache rdepends libpostproc52 libpostproc52 Reverse Depends: libxine2-ffmpeg libxine1-ffmpeg xbmc-bin vlc-nox transcode mpv mplayer2 mplayer-gui mplayer mencoder libpostproc-dev gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg libgmerlin-avdec1 ffmpeg2theora Regarding the migration libpostproc is missing only from stable, it is present in testing thus every package using it can still migrate and I think it is OK. I think there may be a misunderstanding here, libpostproc *is* in stable, but as part of the libav package. It was phased out after the 0.5 release, and I packaged it as standalone. I've packaged it as standalone source package because of the longish list of packages that use it. The list of packages you quote above still seems rather long, and many of those packages seem very undermaintained to me. Pushing them to drop libpostproc may be the right thing to do, but please be aware that this may take years. That's why I think a lintian warning may of help here. I did not push very hard on this issue because I wanted to see if there would be any upstream activity and it would make sense to keep libpostproc anyways. It turns out that the upstream repository http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git didn't see real functional development that aren't build fixes for years. Moreover, nobody stepped up to take over the package. Now 1.5y later, it may be a good time to phase libpostproc out of debian for good. I think we should discuss the mass bug filing on debian-devel in advance, but otherwise I'm OK with the removal. Would you like to announce the removal? I'm a bit uncomfortable with discussing that on debian-devel TBH, as I don't see any chance we can remove libpostproc anytime soon. The current libpostproc package is in testing and is supposely working fine. Porting package to libavfilter is going to require upstream involvement, which is looking at the list of affected upstreams not going to happen soon. I'm really unsure what's the best way to proceed from here. I will migrate XBMC to libavfilter when I can find some time for that. If XBMC needs a deinterlacing fitler, I believe that vf_yadif is one of the best fitlers around for this task. I'd say this should be done regardless what's happening with libpostproc. -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
2014/1/11 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu wrote: I think filing bugs is the best way of starting the removal of libpostproc. There are only a few packages depending on it, thus adding a linitian warning may be overkill: $ apt-cache rdepends libpostproc52 libpostproc52 Reverse Depends: libxine2-ffmpeg libxine1-ffmpeg xbmc-bin vlc-nox transcode mpv mplayer2 mplayer-gui mplayer mencoder libpostproc-dev gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg libgmerlin-avdec1 ffmpeg2theora Regarding the migration libpostproc is missing only from stable, it is present in testing thus every package using it can still migrate and I think it is OK. I think there may be a misunderstanding here, libpostproc *is* in stable, but as part of the libav package. It was phased out after the 0.5 release, and I packaged it as standalone. I've packaged it as standalone source package because of the longish list of packages that use it. The list of packages you quote above still seems rather long, and many of those packages seem very undermaintained to me. Pushing them to drop libpostproc may be the right thing to do, but please be aware that this may take years. That's why I think a lintian warning may of help here. I did not push very hard on this issue because I wanted to see if there would be any upstream activity and it would make sense to keep libpostproc anyways. It turns out that the upstream repository http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git didn't see real functional development that aren't build fixes for years. Moreover, nobody stepped up to take over the package. Now 1.5y later, it may be a good time to phase libpostproc out of debian for good. I think we should discuss the mass bug filing on debian-devel in advance, but otherwise I'm OK with the removal. Would you like to announce the removal? I'm a bit uncomfortable with discussing that on debian-devel TBH, as I don't see any chance we can remove libpostproc anytime soon. The current libpostproc package is in testing and is supposely working fine. Porting package to libavfilter is going to require upstream involvement, which is looking at the list of affected upstreams not going to happen soon. I'm really unsure what's the best way to proceed from here. From the email [1] on the VLC list I had the impression that libpostproc is broken. If it is working fine I don't see why it should be dropped and I'll keep libpostproc support in XBMC, too. I have looked into the source more closely and it seems using a very hidden setting XBMC users can pass postproc filters to libpostproc thus I can't replace it with vf_yadif. So if libpostproc will stay with us could you please upload it to wheezy-backports to let me upload xbmc, too? Cheers, Balint [1]https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2013-March/092249.html I will migrate XBMC to libavfilter when I can find some time for that. If XBMC needs a deinterlacing fitler, I believe that vf_yadif is one of the best fitlers around for this task. I'd say this should be done regardless what's happening with libpostproc. -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#702762: More or less dead upstream
Package: libpostproc As VLC upstream points out in http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2013-March/092249.html: http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2013-March/092249.html The package is provided as a transitional measure until all reverse dependencies have been changed to no longer need it. After this has been implemented in all packages in the debian archive, this bug should be repurposed to track the phasing out of libpostproc of the archive. -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
