[packman] libavcore needs latest libavutil

[Carl Eugen Hoyos]

Manfred Tremmel <manfred at ...> writes:

> 
> Am Montag, 15. November 2010 schrieb Pascal Bleser:
> > On 2010-11-15 14:53:26 (+0100), Pascal Bleser 
> <pascal.bleser at ...> wrote:
> > > On 2010-11-15 12:27:40 (+0000), Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos at ...> 
> wrote:
> > > > When I updated (only) ffmpeg today, libavcore was installed, but
> > > > libavutil was not automatically updated, leading to this output:
> > > > $ ffmpeg
> > > > ffmpeg: relocation error: /usr/lib64/libavcore.so.0: symbol
> > > > av_default_item_name, version LIBAVUTIL_50 not defined in file
> > > > libavutil.so.50 with link time reference
> > >
> > > Seems like ffmpeg is missing explicit Requires on the libraries
> > > that spawn out of it.
> > 
> > On a side not: thank you very much ffmpeg upstream to not care about
> > releases and proper SONAMEs, this is really a mess we have to take
> >  care of as packagers, and it's a major pain in the bottom *sigh*
> 
> This never should happen if you do a "zypper up" or "zypper dup" is 
> done, because there's allways updated the complete package.

That is exactly what I did today (I did not update manually) and the libraries
where NOT updated (which - one could argue - might be ok, because this works
most of the time, but not with the introduction of libavcore which needs a newer
libavutil; additionally, it probably makes no sense regarding the cause of the
update).

Let me repeat that I think it is very good of Packman not to use (so-called)
"released" versions of FFmpeg, but to update regularly.

[...]

> > > > Allow me to repeat that Packman currently violates FFmpeg
> > > > copyrights by distributing a non-free binary (that may not be
> > > > redistributed). Note that the GPL (which Packmans version of
> > > > FFmpeg contains code for) requires all parts of the software to
> > > > be licensed under the GPL (or a compatible software license)
> > > > which is not the case for the binary Packman distributes
> > > > (=Packman risks to permanently loose the right to distribute
> > > > GPL'ed software in this package).
> > >
> > > You mean because of faac ?
> > 
> > AFAICS, ffmpeg is built without faac support. At least it is now.
> 
> It's build with libfaac support! But I can't see the problem. Everything 
> inside the ffmpeg package is part of the ffmpeg tarball (libfaac.c 
> includes lgpl licence), even the includes out of libfaac which are 
> included are lgpl licencesd. It's linked against a shared library 
> (libfaac) which contains lgpl and proprietary code like it's provided 
> from the faac project. If compiling gpl software against proprietary 
> libs is not allowed, every Windows and MacOS GPL software is illegal 
> because they all link direct or indirect against proprietary libs of the 
> underlying Operation System.

Please actually read the licenses before making such statements (that do not
really add confidence): The system libraries are explicitely mentioned in the
licenses (that - iirc - were written at a time when no free system libraries
existed for real world applications).

Let me add the following: Originally, we all did not know that libfaac was never
free software, so we (FFmpeg developers) can hardly blame anybody who
distributes an old FFmpeg version compiled as GPL and linked against libfaac.
Since I've explained now that libfaac is non-free and you cannot link a GPL'ed
software against a non-free library, please stop distributing such binaries.

Thank you, Carl Eugen