[packman] ffmpeg & gstreamer mess
davejplater at gmail.com
Fri Jul 22 10:06:25 CEST 2016
On 7/22/16, Sergey Kondakov <virtuousfox at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20.06.2016 00:36, Richard Brown wrote:
>> On 19 June 2016 at 16:41, Dave Plater <davejplater at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The pkg in multimedia:libs is about one hundred, thousand, million
>>>> times more at risk of being broken than the pkg in Factory
>>> Not if it's well maintained
>> There is _NO SUCH THING_ as a well maintained Devel Project.
>> They EXIST to be where things are put together, broken and ultimately
>> fixed before being submitted to Factory for testing into Tumbleweed
>> A Devel Project which doesn't break from time to time is not doing
>> it's job properly.
> You may repeat that as long as you like just to make en excuse for your
> bad maintenance practices of OBS but no actual user will ever believe that.
> Also, minuscule and specific testing in virtual machines or whatever you do
> that "openQA" has never saved from actual problems even while using 100%
> official packages. Probably not because it's bad but because it's not enough
> negate dumb human decisions, overcomplex bureaucracy with the lack of
> well-structured up-to-date human-readable guides to deal with it, lack of
> usage and belief that your dysfunctional defaults (once again, screw KDE5,
> Gnome3, VLC, pulseaudio, wicked, kernel-default and, especially, BTRFS !) is
> one and only way to do things.
>>>> Because it's a devel project, where packages are MEANT to be broken
>>>> from time to time, meanwhile we KNOW the ffmpeg packages in Factory
>>>> work as they get tested in openQA as part of the VLC testing.
>>>> I've said it before and I'll say it again Packman building against
>>>> multimedia:libs has always been silly
>>> Once Packman packages weren't linked and that resulted in many
>>> problems with incompatible libraries and out of sync maintenance.
>> In short, this is dangerous, wrong, stupid and downright idiotic.. and
>> I'm being polite and holding back what i really think about it.
>> At the very LEAST ffmpeg in Packman should be linked to
>> Packman for Leap should be linked to the version in Leap, so that
>> users do not have to suffer needless risk upgrading their packages.
> For once we agree ! Building anything against non-official repo version of
> something so fundamental as ffmpeg is almost as idiotic and irresponsible as
> removing distribution installer from the official repo of that
> Instead, "TW" should get kick in the ass to update its ffmpeg version.
> VLC and mpv aren't the only packages depending on it, you know ! But then
> we're talking about the people who seem to removed 32bit gstreamer packages
> Packman's TW repo even though wine's A/V capabilities are dependant upon
> And because of things like that whole wine bugtracker is filled with
> for years ( https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9127 ) from users who's
> distribution doesn't build it properly. Goodbye, pre-rendered cutscenes in
> and multimedia applications in general.
> Why the hell there is there "Factory" and "TW" repoes with different
> configuration and packages ? Which one a normal person should use ?
> You both, TW team and Packman team, are at fault here.
> * Just update ffmpeg in TW.
> * Link ffmpeg and gstreamer and any other
> framework for each distro independently.
> * Work on better unnecessary rebuild-avoidance for OBS.
> * Whatever commercial entity owns openSUSE should buy Packman servers,
> it purposely made any openSUSE desktop installation 100% dependant upon
> Novell had a Russian office, Russian law spits on software patenting,
> they can have them there legally.
> I would say that if anything happens with Packman then, most likely,
> will lose all its non-server installations.
>>> Packman is a safe way for users to get the newest packages, especially
>>> Leap users because it rarely gets new packages. It's a pity somebody
>>> doesn't donate some extra server power to Packman to speed up the
>>> build cycle. Maintaining the Packman packages in multimedia apps and
>>> libs has taken away the old volatility that used to come from Packman.
>>> It's a far better option to enabling multiple obs repositories for Leap.
>> No, Packman is not a safe way and this thread is sadly yet another
>> example of packman maintainers ignoring sound advice from seasoned
>> packagers who know what they're talking about.
>> And I'm not really talking about myself, you can ignore me all you
>> want, but Bjorn is an expert on all things packaging and OBS,
>> especially when it comes to large projects, it's downright crazy that
>> his good advice appears to be ignored.
>> Just as Tomas Chvatal's has been ignored on this list repeatedly.
>> Please guys, I've been a long supporter of Packman, even running
>> several servers for pmbs before I changed employer, so not erode my
>> goodwill and poison my soft spot for your efforts by stubbornly
>> sticking to your guns and risking the smooth operation of Tumbleweed
>> and Leap users in the process.
>> Please link your packages more appropriately.
>> Please do whatever you can to avoid unnecessary drift between Packman
>> and the distributions for which you are building Packman for.
>> Please rebuild="direct"
>> and Please listen to guys like Bjorn and Tomas when they give advice,
>> they know what they're talking about
> Such a good advice... if only consideration gone both ways.
> On 20.06.2016 11:28, Dave Plater wrote:
> >> No, Packman is not a safe way and this thread is sadly yet another
> >> > example of packman maintainers ignoring sound advice from seasoned
> >> > packagers who know what they're talking about.
> > I actually don't agree with the zypper dup -r Packman model and would
> > rather see a Requires: package-version-release model but this is still
> > to be qualified, I never dup Packman, I just looked at my mix of
> > gstreamer packages and they are from both openSUSE and Packman with no
> > ill effects.
> Or you could just properly set repo priority, the last distinguishing
> feature of
> openSUSE along with yast, and not mess with release versions which would
> all dependant packages hardcoded for your particular build for no reason.
I actually agree with you, change my comment above which states
Packman is a safe way to should be a safe way. I'm not really a part
of the Packman team, I'm an openSUSE multimedia maintainer who cares
about the distribution. I've seen things improving and hopefully the
new Packman layout will make a difference but I'm not a part of this,
the decisions are made by a closed group of people.
More information about the Packman