Re: [LAU] state of multimedia

James Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 08:04:27AM +0700, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>
>> Obviously. But if one installs ffmpeg from one of the reccomended yum
>> repostitories and the version of blender that is installed is not the
>> one that is compiled against ffmpeg then it just makes things confusing
>> and annoying for an average user.
>>
>
> I disagree, it's just ignorance of the process. While ignorance can
> cause annoyance, it's not justified.
>
>
>> But I chose to install blender from a system that is setup to use the
>> non restricted packages and instead I get a restricted version. Why is a
>> restricted version given priority over a non restricted version?
>>
>
> You should ask the people who prepared the non restricted package
> repository.
>
> Similar situation has happened to me, when a security update was made to
> a package in the restricted repository it had a version one higher than
> the one in the non-restricted repository. Between the time that the
> restricted packager had released a package, and the non-restricted
> packager had caught up and released one, any user who updated their
> packages would lose functionality.
>
> It is one of the risks of mixing restricted and unrestricted package
> repositories on your system.
>
>
>>>> Jack is included in fedora core IIUC so I have no idea why anyone
>>>> would compile mplayer without jack support.
>>>>
>>> Why not ask them? I imagine you'd find either some bug, or they wanted
>>> to promote some other audio interface, or they've made it an optional
>>> package.
>>>
>> There are no major bugs with jack and mplayer has had working jack
>> support for over 5 years now. If it's a political decision then that's a
>> pretty big call to make. I didn't find any optional packages with yum
>> search.
>>
>
> Doesn't have to be a major bug with jack for such a decision to be made
> ... a minor bug can do it. And remember that it can be bugs that only
> exist between versions of jack and mplayer that you aren't using.
>
> Again, I think you should ask them. Whinging here about a distribution
> packager's choices when the packager isn't going to respond seems a
> pointless exercise.
>
>

That's a bit harsh. I'm hardly whinging at all. I'm attempting to have a
discussion about a topic that I think has relevance on this list.

Basically the seemingly large difference between linux audio apps and
their packaging (at least on Fedora)

>>>> To me it just highlights the state of multimedia support in Fedora
>>>> and possibly other OS's where there is still a level of disconnect
>>>> that IMO has been overcome in the LAD community and is shown by the
>>>> people who package the audio apps.
>>>>
>>> On the other hand, it simplifies the packaging, and gets the packages
>>> out there in some form that basically works. It might not work to the
>>> level of excellence that we demand. A dumbed down distribution.
>>>
>> Fedora is hardly a dumbed down distribution. IMO it's most likely a
>> problem with the people who package for multimedia on Fedora [...]
>>
>
> So talk to them.
>
>

I will once I have assessed the reason behind the decisions and this
list is a good place to get an overview as there are several people on
it who do have indepth experience with packaging apps.

>> but it could be symptomatic of a more institutionalised problem where
>> Linux Multimedia is not at the same level that we can see with Linux
>> Audio across the board.
>>
>
> Institutionalised? What institution?
>
>

This is a broad reference to Linux Multimedia community if such a thing
even exists. We certainly have a Linux Audio community.

>> I'm wondering if this could be partly due to the long term affect of
>> the annual LAC on the LAD community?
>>
>
> Sorry, I don't know what these acronymns mean.
>
>

LAC: Linux Audio Conference
LAD: Linux Audio Developers

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Thu May 7 08:15:01 2009