Re: Notice of mailing list closure: pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Thanks to both of you for your help. I'll add you as moderators shortly after the list migration. Best, Reinhard On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:20 PM Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Excerpts from Reinhard Tartler's message of april 12, 2018 9:44 pm: > > Hi Dominic, > > > > Based on the discussion on this

Re: Notice of mailing list closure: pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Hi Dominic, Based on the discussion on this list, please do migrate the pkg-multimedia-maintainers list. Sorry for the short notice. I assume that the list of current subscribers, as well as the rest of the mailman configuration, will be retained, is that right? I'm OK to continue to serve as old

Re: Notice of mailing list closure: pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Hi Mattia, I am around, but am unsure what to do. Reading through the past mails on this topic on the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list, I thought the plan was to move all packages to use "debian-multime...@lists.debian.org" as maintainer, and we could safely let go of the alioth list. I may

Re: Proposed multimedia team migration to salsa.d.o

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 8:53 AM James Cowgill wrote: > > > listmasters mentioned multiple times that they don't want something on > > l.d.o to appear in the Maintainers field. > > I don't think they said that. They said that they don't want lots of > mailing lists on lists.debian.org for purely fo

Bug#867115: smplayer crashes with "Error parsing option noquiet (option not found)"

Control: severity -1 important Control: tags -1 moreinfo Thank you for your bugreport. I had a look at the issue and have some questions for you. On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 6:09 PM Daniel 'DaB.' Baur wrote: > Package: smplayer > Version: 16.11.0~ds0-1 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders pack

Bug#864664: CVE-2017-9122 CVE-2017-9123 CVE-2017-9124 CVE-2017-9125 CVE-2017-9126 CVE-2017-9127 CVE-2017-9128

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:06 PM Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > Source: libquicktime > Severity: grave > Tags: security > > Please see: > http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2017-9122 > http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2017-9123 > http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.c

Re: kodi on ci20 creator

Sounds good to me. Is there some friendly mips porter who could help us out here? -rt On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:06 PM James Cowgill wrote: > Hi, > > [+CC multimedia team] > > On 02/04/17 17:38, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Mathieu Malaterre > wrote: > >> Hi there

Bug#859216: unblock: jackd2/1.9.10+20150825git1ed50c92~dfsg-5

+1,11 @@ +jackd2 (1.9.10+20150825git1ed50c92~dfsg-5) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Move libjackserver into package libjack-jackd2-0. This avoids a +dangling symbolic link in the package libjack-jackd2-dev. +(Closes: #858525) + + -- Reinhard Tartler Mon, 27 Mar 2017 22:44:11 -0400

Bug#858525: marked as pending

On 03/29/2017 06:20 AM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 2017-03-29 03:09, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> tag 858525 pending >> thanks >> >> Hello, >> >> Bug #858525 reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository. You can >> see the changelog be

Bug#858525: libjack-jackd2-dev: Depend on jackd2

On 2017-03-28 04:04, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:22:41PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote: I think the approach of adding a 'depends' to jackd2 is the simplest. Moving the shared library to the -dev packages doesn't work, because /usr/bin/jackd2 and netserver.

Bug#858525: libjack-jackd2-dev: Depend on jackd2

tags 858525 patch stop Hi, I think the approach of adding a 'depends' to jackd2 is the simplest. Moving the shared library to the -dev packages doesn't work, because /usr/bin/jackd2 and netserver.so link against it. The downside of this patch is that every package that depends on libjack-jackd2-

Bug#834953: ams: Should this package be removed?

Package: ams Severity: normal Hi, The package "ams" hasn't seen an upstream release since April 2014 (cf. http://alsamodular.sourceforge.net/). The last upload to debian was on 2014-04-12. It currently has one RC bug, and if I read popcon correctly, 46 installations: https://qa.debian.org/popcon

Re: Wheezy update of vlc?

On 2016-05-29 13:53, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hello dear maintainer(s), the Debian LTS team would like to fix the security issues which are currently open in the Wheezy version of vlc: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2016-5108 Would you like to take care of this yourself? If ye

Bug#794817: Should mplayer2 be removed from unstable?

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:21 PM Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > On 2015-08-06 23:05:58, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: > > Package: mplayer2 > > Severity: serious > > > > I think mplayer2 should be removed because: > > * It is dead upstream (even the homepage is gone). > > * mplayer is back in Debian, whi

Bug#794578: mplayer2: undefined symbol in libavcodec-ffmpeg

It appears that you have a local copy of libmp3lame in /usr/local/lib, which is most likely the culprit. Please remove that local copy and try again. Does the problem persist? Best, Reinhard On Tue, Aug 4, 2015, 2:54 PM Alex Bernier wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 06:49:14PM +0200, Sebastian R

Re: Bug#793085: ffmpeg: removal of ffmpeg makes files disappear from libav-tools

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015, 4:51 AM Andreas Beckmann wrote: Package: ffmpeg Version: 7:2.7.2-1 Severity: serious User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts replaces-without-breaks Control: affects -1 + libav-tools Hi, during a test with piuparts and DOSE tools I noticed your package causes

Re: Uploading ffmpeg 2.7.2-1

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 7:59 AM Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 20.07.2015 13:48, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > did you already coordinate this transition with the release team? > > Yes. > > > What is the transition tra

Re: Uploading ffmpeg 2.7.2-1

did you already coordinate this transition with the release team? What is the transition tracking bug? We must not start a transition of this size without coordination, in particular given that we are aware of a couple of FTBFS. This all needs the be documented first before we can proceed with upl

Re: libav and FFmpeg: switch over

Keeping the libavcodec-extra packages makes very much sense to me, thank you. Do you need help with uploading to experiemental? As soon as it is in experimental, we can start with filing bugs tracking FTBFS issues in application packages. As usual, I'd suggest tracking them with usertags, so that

Bug#790918: libav-tools: bitrate 448 is not allowed in mp2 / convert to pal dvd with mp2 audio

The patch in the referenced ticket should only have any effect if you used the (deprecated) argument -ab, which the command line in your original report does not use. To be honest, I cannot see how the patch can possibly fix the command invocation that you show. Are you absolutely sure that the pa

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015, 7:15 PM Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: Hi, On 18.06.2015 18:57, Bálint Réczey wrote: > 2015-06-09 21:53 GMT+02:00 Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com>: >> I have now implemented this and it works fine. >> It's in the extra branc

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Jun 18, 2015 7:15 PM, "Andreas Cadhalpun" < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 18.06.2015 18:57, Bálint Réczey wrote: > > 2015-06-09 21:53 GMT+02:00 Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com>: > >> I have now implemented this and it works fine. > >> It's in the ex

Re: Audacity 2.0.6-2 several GUI problems due to wxWidgets 3.x

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:47 PM Peter P. wrote: > Hi, > > thanks for maintaining and developing the audacity package! > > I am on Debian/testing and just upgraded to audacity version 2.0.6 > using apt. I just noticed two new problems: > > 1.) > The 'device bar' is suddenly empty, regardless of u

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi Reinhard, > > On 06.06.2015 20:30, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Bálint Réczey wrote: >>>> The problem is that Debian users must be all

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Bálint Réczey wrote: >> The problem is that Debian users must be allowed to redistribute it, >> but as far as I understand it, it is not allowed to distribute e.g. >> a live DVD with hedgewars and libavcodec-extra installed. >> I also pointed this out in the previou

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

[short answer, I'm on the run] On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: >>> I had considered producing optimized flavors, but I came to the conclusion >>> that it would complicate debian/rules without much benefit, because >>> the flavors are mostly unnecessary: >> >> That's not

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: >> Will ffmpeg build the LGPL and GPL variants as libav did or are all reverse >> dependencies suddenly compatible with the GPL variant? > > Currently Libav only builds GPL-2+ and with libavcodec-extra* GPL-3+ > libraries. > Since the only

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: >> and would rather propose to just rename the current "libav" source >> package to "ffmpeg" and package the latest ffmpeg source tarball. > > Then that ffmpeg source package would take over the binary package > names as well. If you think

Re: multiple uploaders

On Jun 1, 2015 1:35 AM, "Fabian Greffrath" wrote: > And by the current rule, would libav still qualify as being > pkg-multimedia team-maintained? I would say yes: Most recently, Sebastian has not only provided commits, but even uploaded several packages to both unstable and stable-security. So to

Re: multiple uploaders

On Jun 1, 2015 7:11 AM, "Felipe Sateler" wrote: > > On 31 May 2015 at 19:36, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > IMO, if there is no need for team commitment, then there is no need > > for the package to be under team maintenance in the first place. In > > this cas

Re: multiple uploaders

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ross Gammon wrote: >>> If someone suggests a new package is brought into the team, and it is >>> accepted, then the team is making a commitment at that point. >> >> How can you determine team commitment if only a single person is >> working on the package? How is

Re: multiple uploaders

Hi Ross, On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Ross Gammon wrote: > On 05/31/2015 02:58 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> Well, it really boils down what we want the team's reputation to be. >> The rule tests whether or not there is *team* commitment, and for that >> you

Re: multiple uploaders

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On 26 May 2015 at 09:38, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >> >> On 2015-05-26 14:33:41, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote: >> > hmm, nobody ever answered to this email. >> > >> > mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd uploader of qxgedit reminded

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > 2015-05-29 12:22 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Smirnov : >> Thanks for insight into upstream security situation, Balint. >> >> So what would be the next step? Mass bug filings? Shall we draft a template >> here? > Andeas already proposed a

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

Please excuse my previous unfinished reply, it was sent in accident. I'm not sure if this post really adds to this discussion, please consider it as clarifications to my previous post. On May 15, 2015 4:56 PM, "Andreas Cadhalpun" > > I think security is not a decisive topic where either project ca

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On May 15, 2015 4:56 PM, "Andreas Cadhalpun" < andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Hi Reinhard, > > thanks for explaining your point of view here. > > On 15.05.2015 09:23, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > Thanks for this insightful post, Dmitry, > &g

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

Thanks for this insightful post, Dmitry, On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:44 AM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > On Sat, 9 May 2015 16:00:49 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: >> What would you count as very compelling reasons if more features, less bugs >> and better security support are not sufficient? > > More feature

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

going to vote on this now as I really need to hear an opinion from the libav's current maintainer, Reinhard Tartler. I genuinely believe that we all need to hear an opinion from him before taking any further action. Thanks for copying me on this email. It seems that I was automatically unsub

Bug#781812: libav

Control: forwarded -1 libav-d...@lists.libav.org Hi Mathieu, I would appreciate if in future you could provide a bit more details when reassigning bugs. The quote below was all that I had to start working on this issue, which is terse. My understanding of this we are talking about a curious feat

Bug#775593: Bug#773626: libav: multiple security issues

Control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.libav.org/show_bug.cgi?id=805 On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote: > Probably asking FFmpeg upstream would help, maybe Libav upstream also > have been notified about the details. Great idea. I've forwarded this bug to libav upstream. Pleas

Bug#775593: Bug#773626: libav: multiple security issues

Control: severity -1 important On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > On 2014-12-20 23:31:11, Michael Gilbert wrote: >> CVE-2014-8544[4]: >> | libavcodec/tiff.c in FFmpeg before 2.4.2 does not properly validate >> | bits-per-pixel fields, which allows remote attackers to cau

Libav v11.2

Today, we update our release series 11 with the release of Libav v11.2. This release contains several security and bug fixes. This release contains many potentially security-relevant corrections. For details, please refer to the verbose Changelog file at https://git.libav.org/?p=libav.git;a=blob;f

Bug#738760: libav: Add proper raspberry pi CPU detection

On January 6, 2015 8:16:51 AM EST, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >Control: tags -1 + patch > >Hi Peter > >On 2015-01-03 22:36:13, peter green wrote: >> Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >> >there was a request to change the handling of the Raspberry Pi in >the >> >libav package. Could you please explain th

Bug#773055: Fwd: Bug#773055: libav-tools: avconv -target pal-svcd fails with "Unable to parse option value "scan_offset""

Control: forwarded -1 libav-de...@libav.org Hi, This looks like an easy target to fix. Can someone have a look at this? Is this critical and applicable for earlier releases as well? Best, Reinhard -- Forwarded message -- From: Andreas Weber Date: Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 2:48 PM S

Help with backporting Libav patches

Hi folks, Luca, who is doing most of the security work these days in Libav, asks which releases we need to support. To the best of my knowledge, this would in Debian and Ubuntu: release/0.8: wheezy, precise release/9: trusty release/11: jessie, utopic, vivid AFAIUI, we can safely retire release/

Bug#771126: libav/tests/lena.pnm: also not mentioned in debian/copyright

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: > Control: tags -1 -wheezy-ignore > > On 2014-11-27 23:23, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> Quoting Niels Thykier (2014-11-27 22:14:25) >>> [...] >> >> In prior similar bugreport - >> referenced from

Bug#771126: libav/tests/lena.pnm: also not mentioned in debian/copyright

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Hi Reinhard, > > Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-11-27 18:35:05) >> In order to address this, I've proposed to replace lena.pnm with a new >> image, taken by me, at https://github.com/libav/libav/pull/17 >

Bug#771126: libav/tests/lena.pnm: also not mentioned in debian/copyright

In order to address this, I've proposed to replace lena.pnm with a new image, taken by me, at https://github.com/libav/libav/pull/17 I don't really care about the licensing. Is the declaration in the commit message OK? How to declare that in debian/copyright? -- regards, Reinhard _

Re: Bug#770665: libxvidcore4: Xvideo not working

rts core events > [49.583] (**) evdev: Mouseemu virtual keyboard: Device: > "/dev/input/event4" > [49.583] (--) evdev: Mouseemu virtual keyboard: Vendor 0x1f Product 0x1f > [49.583] (--) evdev: Mouseemu virtual keyboard: Found keys > [49.583] (II) evdev: Mouseemu

Bug#770665: libxvidcore4: Xvideo not working

On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Herminio Hernandez, Jr. wrote: > When I was running Ubuntu and Xubuntu this was not an issue. I just > yesterday moved to Debian Jesse. Below are my specs > rican-linux@debian-ppc:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo > processor : 0 > cpu : 7447A, altivec supported > clock : 833.3

Re: x264-10bit wrapper script

On Nov 20, 2014 12:41 AM, "Fabian Greffrath" wrote: > > [changed subject line] > > Hi Julian, > > Am Mittwoch, den 19.11.2014, 20:01 + schrieb Julian Cable: > > Perhaps you can just say: > > This wrapper script has no options. > > thanks again! I improved the wording as you suggested. > > @Rei

Re: faad2 and faac

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Hey Julian, > > I've just tested your approach with the faad2 package and it works just > as expected. I'll add the necessary changes to the Debian packaging soon > [tm]. But please note that we are not in a hurry: testing is currently > f

Re: Ardour FTBFS hurd-i386

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: > > > 2014-10-21 10:45 GMT+02:00 Jaromír Mikeš : >> >> Hi, >> >> ardour FTBFS on hurd-i386 >> Should we build it only linux-any kfreebsd-any ? > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ardour&suite=unstable AFAIUI, hurd has no suppo

Bug#742896: Blank screen on all videos with VDPAU and nVidia card (xbmc)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Wojciech Kuranowski wrote: > Yes, VDPAU acceleration fails with the latest package [xbmc with Anton's > patch compiled against libav]. But it's a bit > better than before, because I have one example of working movie which > was not working with previous libav base

Re: Bits from the Debian Multimedia Team [RELOADED]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Alessio Treglia wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> FWIW, I personally think we should not mention any of "lame", >> "xvidcore", "x264" or "mplayer2". All of these packages

Re: Bits from the Debian Multimedia Team [RELOADED]

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Alessandro Ghedini wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 07:01:09PM +0100, Alessio Treglia wrote: >> Folks, >> >> If you want to add some last bits, please do it by tomorrow morning, > > I updated the mplayer2 section and added mplayer to the dropped section (I > also

Bug#764169: libav-tools: can transcode but not copy Speex audio from Matroska container

Control: Tag -1 upstream On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Package: libav-tools > Version: 6:11-1 > Severity: normal > > > Speex audio in Matroska container behaves oddly: Codec needs to be > explicitly declared, even though avconv lists the codec in extracted > metadata.

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote: > I would also like to add that since Libav and FFmpeg offer different > features they are different enough to consider them as alternates > which have the place in Debian on their own right. This is the part that makes me very uneasy, becaus

Re: RFS: chromaprint 1.2-1

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Simon Chopin wrote: > Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-09-28 20:58:00) >> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Simon Chopin wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'd love it if someone (Reinhard ?) would upload the new version of >

Re: RFS: chromaprint 1.2-1

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Simon Chopin wrote: > Hi, > > I'd love it if someone (Reinhard ?) would upload the new version of > chromaprint sitting in the eponymous pkg-multimedia git repo. As usual, > I haven't updated the changelog in case there are still some changes > needed. looking at

Bug#762492: libav-tools: Audio/video encoding produces an audio encoding error with openshot/kdenlive

Control: tag -1 upstream Thank you for your bug report. On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Charles Laws wrote: > Package: libav-tools > Version: 6:11-1 > Severity: important > > Dear Maintainer, > > My last video project was about 7 weeks ago. Sometime between then and now, I > lost the ability t

Bug#760763: fixed in libav 6:11~beta1-3

Control: reopen -1 Control: tag -1 help On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > Package: libav-tools > Version: 6:11-1 > Followup-For: Bug #760763 > > On Sat, 2014-09-13 at 13:20 +, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > >>* Remove /etc/avserver.conf (Closes: #7

Bug#749659: audacity + wxWidgets 3.0 — Proposing patch

t; proposed change. Would that help? >> >> That would be very useful - then it will be clearer exactly what the >> currently proposed changes are. > > > On 09/09/2014 01:19 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> >> Can you maybe attach a debdiff, please? (BTW, I woul

Bug#760433: libav: FTBFS on x32: Invalid inline assembly

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Daniel Schepler wrote: > Source: libav > Version: 6:11~beta1-2 > Severity: important > Justification: blocker for kde builds > X-Debbugs-CC: Thorsten Glaser > > When I try building libav in an x32 schroot (without the build dependencies on > frei0r, opencv, x264 w

Bug#702762: Fwd: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

What would you recommend to use for the Debian package? Is it useful to have libpostproc in Debian? (see also the backlog of this bug). Please advise. Thanks On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:18:57AM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote: > On 05.09.2014, at 03:46, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > On Thu,

Bug#749659: audacity + wxWidgets 3.0 — Proposing patch

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Olly Betts wrote: > Control: severity -1 serious > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 10:12:37PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> I wonder what's the status of this bug. The most recent email did not >> help to clarify, so I test-compiled

Bug#760763: libav-tools: conffiles not removed

AFAIUI, I should add a debian/libav-tools.maintscript with the following content: rm_conffile /etc/avserver.conf 6:10.2-1~ Does this sound good to you? -- regards, Reinhard ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@l

Bug#749659: audacity + wxWidgets 3.0 — Proposing patch

Control: tag -1 -patch Control: severity -1 normal Hi, I wonder what's the status of this bug. The most recent email did not help to clarify, so I test-compiled wx3.0.patch as proposed in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=749659#35, and can confirm that the package builds fine. Ho

Bug#760763: libav-tools: conffiles not removed

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Paul Wise wrote: > Package: libav-tools > Version: 6:11~beta1-2 > Severity: normal > Usertags: conffile > User: debian...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: obsolete-conffile adequate > > The recent upgrade did not deal with obsolete conffiles properly. > Please use the d

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 08:18:57AM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote: >> On 05.09.2014, at 03:46, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Michael Niedermayer >> > wrote: >> >>&

Bug#760639: mplayer2: PGS subtitle format won't appear

Control: tag -1 upstream Control: forwarded -1 u...@mplayer2.org On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Axel Angel wrote: > Package: mplayer2 > Version: 2.0-728-g2c378c7-2+b2 > Severity: normal > > Dear Maintainer, > > [...] > Playing videos (eg: mkv) containing correctly recognized S_HDMV/PGS > subtitl

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> At the end of the day, I need a source tarball that contains >> maintained sources of a stand-alone libpostproc. I don't care too much >> how it is created, as long as it doesn't result in code-duplication >> with existing sources in De

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi Reinhard > > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 11:33:48PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:22:43PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wr

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 08:22:43PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 10:06:10PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >> >> H

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] patch for x32 for libpostproc

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 10:06:10PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >> Hi, >> >> as discussed in IRC, I was trying to minimal-invasively port >> libpostproc (the Debian source package) to x32¹. I could not >> test it (for lack of a stand-al

Bug#758543: fixed in libdvdnav 5.0.1-1

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Fufu Fang wrote: > Dear Maintainer, > The problem is still there. I have upgraded to 5.0.1-1, I still can't run > mplayer. The error message is still the same. I checked the file list > (https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/libdvdnav4/filelist), > libdvdnavmini.so

Bug#759866: Please package version 5.0.1

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Package: libdvdnav > > 21:23 and I did a libdvdnav 5.0.1 to fix a crash > 21:26 > https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/libdvdnav-devel/2014-August/000222.html > > [libdvdnav] [branch: r

Bug#759866: Please package version 5.0.1

Package: libdvdnav 21:23 and I did a libdvdnav 5.0.1 to fix a crash 21:26 https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/libdvdnav-devel/2014-August/000222.html [libdvdnav] [branch: refs/tags/5.0.1] Tag:916101a1ec4b50d929cb1fd5729764f4b1a1657e > http://git.videolan.org/gitweb.cgi/libdvdnav.git?a=t

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Aug 27, 2014 10:43 AM, "Fabian Greffrath" wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 27.08.2014, 09:52 +0200 schrieb Matteo F. Vescovi: > > Libav for me, of course. > > I am for libav for the next stable release. However, I am open for > anything else after that. To be honest, I recently find the sheer number

Re: Select provider of libav* libraries

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote: > Hi, > > there was a discussion on the debian-devel mailing list about > reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian [1]. The security team made clear [2] > that they will only support one provider of the libav* libraries. So > either libav or FFmpeg coul

Re: Bug#757917: transition: libav11

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 26/08/14 16:05, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort >> wrote: >>> On 18/08/14 21:33, Andrew Kelley wrote: >>>> On Aug 18, 2014 12:22 PM, &

Re: Bug#757917: transition: libav11

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 18/08/14 21:33, Andrew Kelley wrote: >> On Aug 18, 2014 12:22 PM, "Emilio Pozuelo Monfort" wrote: >>> >>> I want to get perl in first. Ping me again when that happens if I haven't >> replied. >> >> Pardon my ignorance but why can

Bug#759199: mencoder: depends on libdvdnavmini.so.4 which is not found

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Stuart Prescott wrote: > How about adding to libdvdnav4: > > Breaks: mplayer (<< 2:1.0), mencoder (<< 2:1.0) > > it tells apt that the packages are broken by the new libdvdnav4 package and > apt will act accordingly. The version restriction is there on the

Bug#759199: mencoder: depends on libdvdnavmini.so.4 which is not found

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Stuart Prescott wrote: > Control: reassign -1 libdvdnav4 > Control: forcemerge 758543 -1 > > Hi Marco, > > thanks for your report -- unfortunately mencoder is not available for sid at > all as it has been removed from the archive. The package you have been using >

Re: git-packaging workflows

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > Resurrecting an old thread > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Recently, Russ' blog post was echoed on http://planet.debian.org: >> >> http://www.eyrie.org/~

Re: vlc/vlc-nox distinction

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > (Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.) > > On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >> On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler

Re: Bug#757917: transition: libav11

On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> vlc FAIL (silly configure check fail, will sort out with upstream) > > Turns out to be sligtly more complicated as thought. After > consultation with j-b (videolan upstream), we decided that we really > should g

Re: vlc/vlc-nox distinction

On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Mateusz Łukasik wrote: > +1 to drop vlc-nox, albo I think we should making samba plugin as a separate > package (#729238) it is pretty unnecessary plugin installation on embedded > systems. We need to go through NEW anyway, so now would be a great time for that.

Re: vlc/vlc-nox distinction

On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > Hello, > > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote : >> I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a >> lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way >>

Re: vlc/vlc-nox distinction

On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a > lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way > to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and w

vlc/vlc-nox distinction

Hi, I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and what plugin should go to vlc-nox. I wonder if having this split is really worth the effort. How w

Bug#755749: vlc: segfault when playing .avi file

Control: tag -1 upstream moreinfo Control: severity -1 normal On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Simon Frei wrote: > Package: vlc > Version: 2.1.4-1+b3 > Severity: important > > Dear Maintainer, > > Playing an .avi file results in seemingly random crashes at non reproducable > points. Sometimes th

Bug#737534: vlc: unsafe use of libtar

Control: tag -1 upstream On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Package: vlc > Severity: important > Tags: security > > Hi, > > vlc uses libtar to unpack skins, however, its use on untrusted data > exposes it to CVE-2013-4420 (#731860). > > Changing the behaviour of libtar app

Re: Bug#757917: transition: libav11

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > linphone FAIL, #758017, NMU uploaded to 5/days > vlc FAIL (silly configure check fail, will sort out with upstream) Turns out to be sligtly more complicated as thought. After consultation with j-b (videolan upstream), we decide

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Hi, > > Jean-Yves Avenard: >> Including rename of constants (code enums id for example). > > Another nail in libav's coffin, then. That's one way to see it. To me, this makes mythtv unsuitable for inclusion into Debian. Let me explain why

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Hi, > > Andreas Cadhalpun: >> Once FFmpeg is back in the archive, it'll be easy to reintroduce MPlayer. It >> has been removed from sid, since it fails to build against Libav, but it >> builds fine against FFmpeg. >> (It uses some of the fe

Bug#756648: Fwd: Bug#756648: mplayer2: add support for ppc64el

Control: forwarded -1 u...@mplayer2.org Control: tag -1 upstream Hi Uoti, The proposed patch (attached to this email) makes sense to me for inclusion into your mplayer2.git. Can you incorporate it? Thanks, Reinhard -- Forwarded message -- From: Breno Leitao Date: Thu, Jul 31, 2

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: > * Does it make sense for me to switch my package? >The rule of thumb is, if your upstream uses FFmpeg for development >you probably want to switch to using it, too. In [1], Moritz from the security team clearly stated that he i

Bug#756174: jackd2 building without any of the required build flags

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-07-27 16:24:11) >> Given that this support is not in place, I wonder if CDBS is the best >> helper infrastructure for this package. > > I don't follow your logic here, Reinhard.

Bug#756174: jackd2 building without any of the required build flags

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > Package: jackd2 > Version: 1.9.10+20140610git97e0e80b~dfsg-1 > Severity: important > Tags: patch > User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com > Usertags: origin-ubuntu utopic ubuntu-patch > > The jackd2 package in Debian unstable does not properly

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >