> > We rebuild the source rpm from the rpmfusion RHEL 6 repo on RHEL 5 by
> > disabling any features that would not build on the older RHEL
> release.
>
> What build errors do you see if you take the sources of F21? I suspect
> they should be easy to fix.
I will give it a try.
Greetings,
Wilfrie
Wilfried Weissmann realnetworks.com> writes:
> > EPEL6: ffmpeg-0.10.11-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
> > F21: ffmpeg-2.3.1-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
> We rebuild the source rpm from the rpmfusion RHEL 6
> repo on RHEL 5 by disabling any features that would
> not build on the older RHEL release.
What build error
> > Sorry, I was referring to the 0.10 branch. I would like to stay on
> > that branch to have a chance to get upstream versions from the
> > rpmfusion repository.
>
> Interesting. For EPEL/RHEL5 (that's what you were refering to?) I see
> ffmpeg 0.4.9.
>
> Actually:
> EPEL5: ffmpeg-0.4.9-0.52.20
Moritz Barsnick gmx.net> writes:
> EPEL5: ffmpeg-0.4.9-0.52.20080908.el5.x86_64.rpm
To the best of my knowledge this has known security
issues including known sample exploits.
Note that it is also missing thousands of features
present in current versions of FFmpeg.
> EPEL6: ffmpeg-0.10.11-1.e
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 09:04:31 +, Wilfried Weissmann wrote:
> Sorry, I was referring to the 0.10 branch. I would like to stay on
> that branch to have a chance to get upstream versions from the
> rpmfusion repository.
Interesting. For EPEL/RHEL5 (that's what you were refering to?) I see
ffm
Wilfried Weissmann realnetworks.com> writes:
> > Just to make sure there are no misunderstandings:
> > 0.10 is over 2,5 years old.
>
> Sorry, I was referring to the 0.10 branch.
Me too.
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org
> Wilfried Weissmann realnetworks.com> writes:
>
> > > "The problem is: Why are you using 0.10?"
> >
> > Simply because that is the version that is available in the rpmfusion
> > repository. I tested if the problem is still in 0.10.14 which was
> > released at the end of June
>
> Just to make su
Wilfried Weissmann realnetworks.com> writes:
> > "The problem is: Why are you using 0.10?"
>
> Simply because that is the version that is available in
> the rpmfusion repository. I tested if the problem is
> still in 0.10.14 which was released at the end of June
Just to make sure there are no
In reply to Carl Eugen Hoyos:
"The problem is: Why are you using 0.10?"
Simply because that is the version that is available in the rpmfusion
repository. I tested if the problem is still in 0.10.14 which was released at
the end of June, but it did not help.
I try to stay away from repackagin
Wilfried Weissmann realnetworks.com> writes:
> Can this change be back ported to 0.10?
This is simple, you could setup a git clone
and ask for a merge.
The problem is: Why are you using 0.10?
There are uncountable (more serious and
more difficult to track!) known issues
that are not reproduc
Hello,
Can this change be back ported to 0.10?
http://git.videolan.org/?p=ffmpeg.git;a=commit;h=7d7b40f48a05af4483b31cdb8b4f1808b97b1f2f
Without the change in libavcodec/pcm.c there is a problem where the wrong
bytes/second rate is written to RIFF WAV files. We try to convert 16bit 16kHz
WAVs t
11 matches
Mail list logo
