Jonathan Dowland schrieb:
> Moritz, what's the security team's opinion on ffmpeg being reintroduced
> as a binary package (providing /usr/bin/ffmpeg) only?
Doesn't make much of a difference, since it still exposes all the same decoders
and demuxers through the ffmpeg binary.
Cheers,
Mori
On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 10:14 -0300, Niv Sardi wrote:
> actually, there is an on-going effort to port libav's features and
> bugfixes into the ffmpeg project.
Good to hear. So the remaining thing is to convince the libav folks to
contribute to ffmpeg again and change the ffmpeg community in ways th
On Fri, Feb 14 2014, p...@debian.org wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>> But how to make the decision whether libav or FFmpeg is better for jessie?
>
> Seems like getting the two upstreams to collaborate and merge the two
> forks is the way to go.
actually, there is
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-14 09:06:34)
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:16:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Paul Wise writes:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >>
> Having both sets of libraries
On Feb 15, Paul Wise wrote:
> > But how to make the decision whether libav or FFmpeg is better for jessie?
> Seems like getting the two upstreams to collaborate and merge the two
> forks is the way to go.
A fork exists exactly because the upstream developers do not want to
collaborate, not becau
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> But how to make the decision whether libav or FFmpeg is better for jessie?
Seems like getting the two upstreams to collaborate and merge the two
forks is the way to go.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 06:46:37PM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 13.02.2014, 21:37 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
> > Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which option
> > (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best for jess
Moritz, what's the security team's opinion on ffmpeg being reintroduced
as a binary package (providing /usr/bin/ffmpeg) only?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debi
Fabian Greffrath writes:
> Am Donnerstag, den 13.02.2014, 21:37 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
>> Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which option
>> (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best for jessie
>> based on the information that is available today?
>
Hi Adrian,
Am Donnerstag, den 13.02.2014, 21:37 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
> Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which option
> (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best for jessie
> based on the information that is available today?
Honestly, I don't t
Moritz Mühlenhoff writes:
> Russ Allbery schrieb:
>> If they're now diverging separate source bases, this isn't really
>> different than the other cases where upstreams have forked and for
>> various reasons we've found uses for both implementations.
> But we still try to minimise such cases as
+++ Stephan Seitz [2014-02-14 13:32 +0100]:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:03:02PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> >But we still try to minimise such cases as much as possible. And for
> >libav/ffmpeg this simply isn't managable at all due to the huge stream
> >of security issues trickling in. We n
Quoting Stephan Seitz (2014-02-14 13:32:41)
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:03:02PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> >But we still try to minimise such cases as much as possible. And for
> >libav/ffmpeg this simply isn't managable at all due to the huge
> >stream of security issues trickling in. We
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 01:03:02PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
But we still try to minimise such cases as much as possible. And for
libav/ffmpeg this simply isn't managable at all due to the huge stream
of security issues trickling in. We need definitely need to pick one
solution only.
And
Russ Allbery schrieb:
> Paul Wise writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>>> Having both sets of libraries in the archive at the same time is what I
>>> called "insane" in the RFP and where I expect additional probems due
>>> to:
>
>> Also, I expect the security team wou
Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-14 09:06:34)
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:16:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Paul Wise writes:
>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>
Having both sets of libraries in the archive at the same time is
what I called "insane" in the RFP an
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:16:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Paul Wise writes:
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> >> Having both sets of libraries in the archive at the same time is what I
> >> called "insane" in the RFP and where I expect additional probems due
> >> t
Paul Wise writes:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> Having both sets of libraries in the archive at the same time is what I
>> called "insane" in the RFP and where I expect additional probems due
>> to:
> Also, I expect the security team would be unhappy to have to fix
> s
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Having both sets of libraries in the archive at the same time is what
> I called "insane" in the RFP and where I expect additional probems
> due to:
Also, I expect the security team would be unhappy to have to fix
security issues twice.
--
b
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Do you have a good idea how to avoid all the problems of mixing both
> > libraries while also creating a sufficient usage of the FFmpeg libraries
> > in a way that both libraries can be in testing at the same time, or are
Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-13 22:40:23)
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 09:21:02PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-13 20:37:47)
>>> Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which
>>> option (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best
>
Hi!
> Do you have a good idea how to avoid all the problems of mixing both
> libraries while also creating a sufficient usage of the FFmpeg libraries
> in a way that both libraries can be in testing at the same time, or are
> you just setting a hurdle intended to be impossible to pass for FFm
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 09:21:02PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-13 20:37:47)
> > Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which
> > option (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best
> > for jessie based on the information that i
Quoting Adrian Bunk (2014-02-13 20:37:47)
> Are you as Debian Multimedia Maintainer willing to discuss which
> option (libav, FFmpeg, some solution of shipping both) will be best
> for jessie based on the information that is available today?
It will certainly be best for Jessie to have a library
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2014-02-13 14:43, The Wanderer wrote:
> I was not aware that the decision of whether to go with libav or
> with FFmpeg had involved any consideration at all of which one was
> better, only consideration of which one had someone available who
> was
25 matches
Mail list logo
