[packman] libavcore needs latest libavutil

[Manfred Tremmel]

Am Montag, 15. November 2010 schrieb 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.

Ok, then this must be because of the "downgrade" of the build numbers 
because of switching the build repository to testing, otherwise I can't
see what situation can keep zypper away from doing a correct update.

> 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).

Ok, you are right. I've reed the GPL and LICENSE file from ffmpeg and 
yes, I've made a mistake. I've also turned of building libfaac support
in my daily snapshot.

> 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.

Done.

-- 
Machs gut    | http://www.iivs.de/schwinde/buerger/tremmel/

Manfred      | http://packman.links2linux.de/