Re: fdk-aac: who knows more?
Been reading the license. It's nice to point out explicit terms that are deemed non-free to back-up any claim, otherwise it sounds like FUD.. The part of the license that does not seem DFSG-compliant to me is this one: You may not charge copyright license fees for anyone to use, copy or distribute the FDK AAC Codec software or your modifications thereto. This indeed appears to contradict DSFG #6: --- 6: No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. --- HOWEVER, I am not sure what the term COPYRIGHT LICENSE exactly means. I would like to know if someone else could shed more light on this expression, perhaps with some german legal background as I suspect it to be the litteral translation by the Fraunhofer institute of some german legal notion. If one thinks of the Android case where this code was extracted from, this part of the license seems to mean that it is possible to distribute and charge for a software that incorporates the encoder in binary form _but_ that free access to the source code, without a copyright license fee, must be provided, which is what Android is doing and the reason this code has been released to begin with. If that is indeed the meaning of the license, then this would pretty much be equivalent to the GPL requirements on modification and access to the source code and so I would not see any other reason to consider this license non-free. Anyone? Romain 2012/9/3 Fabian Greffrath fab...@greffrath.com: Am 02.08.2012 10:04, schrieb Fabian Greffrath: Is fdk-aac finally the first *free* high-quality AAC encoder or is it just the next *non-free* one after FAAC? Nobody? ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#636071: dssi-dev requires libasound2-dev
Package: dssi-dev Version: 1.1.0-3 Severity: normal Hi! dssi.h requires an alsa header provided by libasound2-dev. Therefore, it seems to me that libasound2-dev should be a binary-dep of dssi-dev. Romain -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages dssi-dev depends on: ii ladspa-sdk1.13-1 sample tools for linux-audio-dev p ii pkg-config0.26-1 manage compile and link flags for dssi-dev recommends no packages. Versions of packages dssi-dev suggests: ii libjack-dev 1:0.121.0+svn4469-2 JACK Audio Connection Kit (develop -- no debconf information ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: lame_3.98.4+repack2-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
2011/7/29 Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org: Accepted: lame-doc_3.98.4+repack2-1_all.deb to main/l/lame/lame-doc_3.98.4+repack2-1_all.deb (...) Guys, I am impressed, really impressed... Thanks you all! Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#627818: ffmpeg segmentation fault __memcpy_ssse3 () at ../sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcpy-ssse3.S:119
Hi all, 2011/5/24 Marco Mattiolo marco.matti...@hotmail.it: Hi. I'm having a problem with ffmpeg, converting flv downloaded by youtube-dl to audio-only ogg vorbis. I had debian-multimedia repo enabled, so I purged all packages related to that repo, before generating this bugreport. Hope this really helps getting a better ffmpeg. Also hope not to waste your time. Thank you $ gdb ffmpeg GNU gdb (GDB) 7.2-debian Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type show copying and show warranty for details. This GDB was configured as x86_64-linux-gnu. For bug reporting instructions, please see: http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/... Reading symbols from /usr/bin/ffmpeg...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/ffmpeg...done. done. (gdb) set pagination 0 (gdb) run -i XBHzFb0toqc.flv -f ogg -acodec libvorbis -vn KT tunstall - Suddenly I see.ogg Starting program: /usr/bin/ffmpeg -i XBHzFb0toqc.flv -f ogg -acodec libvorbis -vn KT tunstall - Suddenly I see.ogg [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] FFmpeg version 0.6.2-4:0.6.2-3, Copyright (c) 2000-2010 the Libav developers built on Apr 30 2011 11:45:41 with gcc 4.5.2 configuration: --extra-version=4:0.6.2-3 --prefix=/usr --enable-avfilter --enable-avfilter-lavf --enable-vdpau --enable-bzlib --enable-libgsm --enable-libschroedinger --enable-libspeex --enable-libtheora --enable-libvorbis --enable-pthreads --enable-zlib --enable-libvpx --disable-stripping --enable-runtime-cpudetect --enable-vaapi --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-gpl --enable-postproc --enable-swscale --enable-x11grab --enable-libfaad --enable-libdirac --enable-libfaad --enable-librtmp --enable-libdc1394 --enable-shared --disable-static libavutil 50.15. 1 / 50.15. 1 libavcodec 52.72. 2 / 52.72. 2 libavformat 52.64. 2 / 52.64. 2 libavdevice 52. 2. 0 / 52. 2. 0 libavfilter 1.19. 0 / 1.19. 0 libswscale 0.11. 0 / 0.11. 0 libpostproc 51. 2. 0 / 51. 2. 0 [flv @ 0x64b6b0]Estimating duration from bitrate, this may be inaccurate Input #0, flv, from 'XBHzFb0toqc.flv': Metadata: duration : 197 starttime : 0 totalduration : 197 width : 320 height : 240 videodatarate : 81 audiodatarate : 103 totaldatarate : 192 framerate : 25 bytelength : 4731985 canseekontime : true sourcedata : BD075E384HH1306095687603251 purl : pmsg : Duration: 00:03:16.60, start: 0.00, bitrate: 188 kb/s Stream #0.0: Video: h264, yuv420p, 320x240 [PAR 1:1 DAR 4:3], 82 kb/s, 25 tbr, 1k tbn, 50 tbc Stream #0.1: Audio: aac, 44100 Hz, stereo, s16, 105 kb/s File 'KT tunstall - Suddenly I see.ogg' already exists. Overwrite ? [y/N] y Output #0, ogg, to 'KT tunstall - Suddenly I see.ogg': Metadata: encoder : Lavf52.64.2 Stream #0.0: Audio: libvorbis, 44100 Hz, stereo, s16, 64 kb/s Stream mapping: Stream #0.1 - #0.0 Press [q] to stop encoding Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. __memcpy_ssse3 () at ../sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcpy-ssse3.S:119 119 ../sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcpy-ssse3.S: File o directory non esistente. in ../sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcpy-ssse3.S I ran into a similar bug in the recent past that was due to frame memory not being aligned. Memory alignment is required to use SSE optimisations. Maybe that is the issue here too? Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#624274: produces invalid streams
Package: libvo-aacenc0 Version: 0.1.0~rc1-1 Severity: normal Streams produced by libvo-aacenc0 as present in package 0.1.0~rc1-1 produces invalid streams, including with the example provided upstream. This can be noticed with mplayer for instance, which logs the following errors: A: 36.5 (36.5) of 0.0 (unknown) 2.8% 18% [aac @ 0xe57c60]Input buffer exhausted before END element found A: 48.2 (48.2) of 0.0 (unknown) 3.0% 19% [aac @ 0xe57c60]channel element 3.8 is not allocated A: 60.4 (01:00.4) of 0.0 (unknown) 3.0% 17% [aac @ 0xe57c60]Input buffer exhausted before END element found A: 86.3 (01:26.3) of 0.0 (unknown) 2.9% 19% [aac @ 0xe57c60]channel element 3.8 is not allocated A: 90.7 (01:30.6) of 0.0 (unknown) 2.9% 18% [aac @ 0xe57c60]Pulse data corrupt or invalid. The same problems are noticed by faad. There seems to be an updated version of the original codebase there: https://github.com/mstorsjo/vo-aacenc This version does not appear to have this issue. Romain -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.38-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages libvo-aacenc0 depends on: ii libc6 2.11.2-13 Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib libvo-aacenc0 recommends no packages. libvo-aacenc0 suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: lame_3.98.4-1_i386.changes REJECTED
2011/4/19 Torsten Werner twer...@debian.org: Am 19.04.2011 21:02, schrieb Sebastian Dröge: On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 18:56 +, Torsten Werner wrote: the package fails to comply with the LGPL. Quoting from the top level README: (LGPL, see www.gnu.org) with the following modification: ... 2. You agree not to enforce any patent claims for any aspect of MPEG audio compression, or any other techniques contained in the LAME source code. But the LPGL is clear: You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. What exactly is wrong with this? Sure, it's not LGPL anymore and not even LGPL compatible but by itself it should be a valid license. Many file headers suggest that the code is plain LGPL licensed. Why do you think the code got relicensed by all copyright holders? Please clearly document such a license change. I do not think that it is the package maintainer's duty to check with all copyright holders that they agree with the license of an upstream package. I have never seen that before and I do not think that this has been done for any other package. What exactly makes you think that the situation should be different with lame? Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Package should be removed..
Well my main concern is about the confusion that can result of having two packages. I believe it would be important to know whether or not the old icecast provides something that icecast2 does not.. On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote: On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 09:33:41AM -0600, Romain Beauxis wrote: I agree though I am not sure whether Gerardo and Ivan were talking about icecast 1 or 2.. I any case, I believe they are welcome to maintain either of them among the multimedia team, right ? Sure! Except if it is v1 they want to maintain and this team is hostile towards keeping that alive: Then they are better off doing it separately - but I cannot imagine us being hostile :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJNSC5MAAoJECx8MUbBoAEhyEcP/jGmxzDkyBkSPuJwgHeHCZLp 1XrcKLD4nvxFcbPyaLkSP24DVGMbiTEpEM+5n7UK051IY8zlepLZJKp8ypuyBZaY bXGh/kIiAxUDQEl89QFkdDyutcJTT3jj46EgiISAxkH37lfgRUxHdnKbCQGMBSgA 7QXfz9U5OrgGPRFyiO3hMJ00M3+JLnKI+0LDYz0nxi05OVsiLlsbR1CONKeizkI8 y1TfuvdbRoYq0yssUgp8pSGGIi5PKxuVqvmg3k7bo4fyPaRFB/n8XjcZ0eFmL9ya J+ib7ZJIhkkcsZ1ayrInm0T1QATsKji2D0EvvKCnrZ6BbsHjpWO6DM+4zA4jOi81 GtoxEl4RgBu2sNEqSz8nvGUWwxr2oeukcTbQ9G1dGLZLUULmTZdELp02zhJ+cwMw ECoUYTzst/xtpYWWpVCwWuPvuZ4ATR6HcROfpHpcYMtJpJtVz4GHcMdD4Qz/pifM uG4HPrG810cDqjnwlNZSjLUKdyxVFgSLrxzGnwyPvbrMEh2py2fdS1oamaatxVHa 1gLva8Gs0xdZ0Z4ZOxyUFQ/eH7TNatzMmBQT0O14G85WbxHcgjGoLCysu8c7PzqM oYe21dc7dH6Unj3uAaeDDDxOlTvgemqBMzw/Q1OyVxi59kkcrpc3g8cxo56P9tA/ WdFN4+dWo7s7p8R7EA2f =GOiV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- They try to fool the black population, By telling them that Jah Jah Dead. But II know that... Jah no dead! ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Package should be removed..
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote: On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 11:48:06AM -0600, Romain Beauxis wrote: On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Ivan Diaz saisyukusan...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Hi Ivan and Gerardo! Yes you are right, icecast2 is the only active package and it don't make sense have active the old release, in this case we support the idea that icecast must be dropped and make it as transitional package to icecast2. Thanks for your clarification. I also believe that if you are still interested in contributing to icecast2's packaging you would be very welcom to participate as well. Most certainly you are welcome! :-) By the way, should we try to remove the package before the next release ? Romain Please consider joining our team. More info here: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJNSEhBAAoJECx8MUbBoAEh12gP/1L9sjWRHlD4pxnZmxoVhq3d viXh0b/8xSayAs3kHiJ7CM8Tm03zcbHevlbwnX4S0aC8FstTmyeizih+7OvizQXf jPMH3JxqKZVmxzyWM+10KjD/Ai7eIED2QcIQ802J46PzHAKkm+aBzd3rsK1cl1/2 S6TCrVFui50rAXMYzWR8SRWXkHMlqKIxDO5Bi9xXLDFM8aOWNPL/+fsYvxkHbWZp CrJmmWJgPChXHMU9MM/uG0qvJYAOOiNu/+vtkuISla0E3SfN6UHLdY1h8UMFfn8Z aoLHfsm8nhpxU0T4qreb5YF8z2wuLPFcvnOy7IV3rCtXI8KjMhxNsPmEJm3EmxfB MnafdaH1znAHDvvJpobZBCOFJQo2FAcra+xvp9yVlZnDQa2+mx2AjKOFcnyeIi3L k+/7aniAYZcoeMtDwyWVQ+t8Jiug4YXBfoqUq7tGIrqi5BjAc3MB4sYa9+GzzbB8 ZHWqs33qWiJDLefbz7CjOrsyISJFv+P58pjW85YSjItWCDopeqyN72PIt4TsEVYR UxSzLcJpL0YUbAgh9FZdCIzWCdTV4OpQMm4et02nCfWbJ9Bond9+D+z3Qw7gR4A0 qMSq3vqT1nSCGWfHbtIBIBPOGS50AcYkK8JWLBeBbIVU/q3Nv563pbb/Y7JI6NqI h5NeXQ16kZZhJgHEpc0x =sUNz -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- They try to fool the black population, By telling them that Jah Jah Dead. But II know that... Jah no dead! ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Package should be removed..
Hi! I just discovered this package.. I believe it should be removed, icecast2 has been around for a while now and is a clear alternative.. Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Bits from the Debian Multimedia Team [RELOADED]
Le jeudi 27 janvier 2011 03:33:40, Fabian Greffrath a écrit : Am 27.01.2011 00:48, schrieb Alessio Treglia: I've been thinking that maybe our audience would like to know what the Dear Debian Multimedia Team has planned to do for Wheezy (if there's something already planned), so now that Squeeze is right behind the next door, WDYT about starting to work on a new bits-from doc? I can think of some very exciting plans to come true when lame/xvidcore/x264 get finally accepted through the NEW queue... sigh Indeed.. Sorry for the lame (haha) question but I did not follow why lame would be accepted now and was not before.. ? Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Bits from the Debian Multimedia Team [RELOADED]
Le jeudi 27 janvier 2011 03:33:40, Fabian Greffrath a écrit : Am 27.01.2011 00:48, schrieb Alessio Treglia: I've been thinking that maybe our audience would like to know what the Dear Debian Multimedia Team has planned to do for Wheezy (if there's something already planned), so now that Squeeze is right behind the next door, WDYT about starting to work on a new bits-from doc? I can think of some very exciting plans to come true when lame/xvidcore/x264 get finally accepted through the NEW queue... sigh Indeed.. Sorry for the lame (haha) question but I did not follow why lame would be accepted now and was not before.. ? Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Ocaml-bjack.
Le mardi 14 septembre 2010 00:44:32, Reinhard Tartler a écrit : The straight-forward solution would be to change this dependency to libjack-jackd2-dev | libjack-dev but I would like to know if this is the solution you would advise. No, we really want to use the headers from the jackd1 implementation to be used by default. This change would break that. Gotcha, thanks. R. ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Ocaml-bjack.
Le lundi 13 septembre 2010 05:51:15, Reinhard Tartler a écrit : On Fr, Sep 10, 2010 at 23:02:05 (CEST), Romain Beauxis wrote: Hi all, I just realized that the binNMU of libbjack-ocaml(-dev) was not sufficient because libbjack-ocaml-dev declares a dependency on libjack-dev. Sorry? I don't follow. can you please elaborate why this doesn't work? Sorry, I should have been more precise.. I think it is reasonable to have a dependency on the -dev package of a library when installing the corresponding ocaml -dev binding, so I want to know what to do now. Do the ocaml jack bindings work with both jackd1 and jackd2? or do they require a specific flavor? what about potential other jack implementations like tschack? The bindings do not require any particular flavor. The problem is that any program using libbjack-ocaml must compile against it, thus installing libbjack-ocaml-dev. libbjack-ocaml-dev has a dependency on libjack-dev, which pulls jackd1. I believe that instead one should be able to use any jack implementation for the build. Also, when building liquidsoap inexperimental, I have a failure in cowbuilder because some of the dependencies pull jack2 and ocaml-bjack pulls jack1. Adding a dependency on the developpement package of the corresponding C library in libbjack-ocaml-dev seems a reasonable requirement to me, though I think it has been discussed in that past I think. The straight-forward solution would be to change this dependency to libjack-jackd2-dev | libjack-dev but I would like to know if this is the solution you would advise. Then, the other questions is: should this be also propagated to testing ? The answer seems to be yes to me but again, I would like to have your input on this. Thanks, Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Ocaml-bjack.
Hi all, I just realized that the binNMU of libbjack-ocaml(-dev) was not sufficient because libbjack-ocaml-dev declares a dependency on libjack-dev. I think it is reasonable to have a dependency on the -dev package of a library when installing the corresponding ocaml -dev binding, so I want to know what to do now. In particular: * Is there a canonical way to set a dependency on libjack-dev that will follow the defaults later ? * What should I do regarding testing/squeeze ? Should I prepare a new upload and ask for a freeze exception ? Thanks for you help, Romain ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
