On Sat, Feb 10, 2024, 01:50 Sérgio Basto wrote:
> "In order to update Exiv2, we need to know if this is okay to enable
> BMFF support. Patents have theorically expired and it is enabled by
> default in the latest version."
>
> until isn't clear by legal it should be disabled , if default is
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 16:53 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 4:23 PM Sérgio Basto
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to bring to your attention that Fedora would benefit with
> > update of exiv2 [1] and protobuf [2] but these packages have lots
> > of
> > dependencies
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 4:23 PM Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring to your attention that Fedora would benefit with
> update of exiv2 [1] and protobuf [2] but these packages have lots of
> dependencies and the update of the dependent packages is not trivial .
> tips, ideas and
Am Fr., 9. Feb. 2024 um 17:23 Uhr schrieb Sérgio Basto :
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring to your attention that Fedora would benefit with
> update of exiv2 [1] and protobuf [2] but these packages have lots of
> dependencies and the update of the dependent packages is not trivial .
> tips, ideas and
Hi,
I'd like to bring to your attention that Fedora would benefit with
update of exiv2 [1] and protobuf [2] but these packages have lots of
dependencies and the update of the dependent packages is not trivial .
tips, ideas and opinions ? to do these soname updates
thank you
[1]
