xine-lib: splitting off patented stuff

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Sebastian!

Sebastian Dröge [2005-12-11 15:14 +0100]:
> I have to disagree in the case of ffmpeg. IMHO it's currently better to
> ship a copy of ffmpeg with every package using it to always have a
> working version with that package. Because of their API instabilities we
> had enough problems in the past and already have one again with
> transcode.

Hm, does upstream know about this problem? Did somebody teach them
what a SONAME is for?

Static copies are a real pain; fixing a bug of a security vuln in
ffmpeg would mean to update n packages, and, e. g. I don't even know
*which* packages to change.

> But nonetheless this would mean a main xine-lib package with less
> codecs than now and a multiverse one with the missing parts (and
> some more as we have some optional libraries which are needed for
> some plugins in multiverse)

Right, wasn't that the primary idea of the split in the first place?

> Another "problem" right now is, that the dependencies for all the
> different plugins are dropped intentionally, some of them completely,
> some are moved to Recommends.
> Seems to be wrong to me and I could change it when nobody has any
> objections against it...

IMHO Suggests: is exactly the right thing for those. The set of
depended and recommended packages must be self-contained (at least
that's true for Debian, and it makes sense to me), but it is ok to
suggest packages in other components.

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt              http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer   http://www.ubuntulinux.org
Debian Developer        http://www.debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20051212/19e17593/attachment.pgp