everyone wants to get their software in distirbution specific way... it's the easiest to manage. and full inclusion in most distros is not an option due to the fear of patented compression algorithms, which may or might not be real threat.
however if someone is willing to create a static build of cinelerra, he has my _full_ support. we really really need that bye andraz On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 11:17 +0200, Marcin Kostur wrote: > Dear Andraz, > > Don't you think that providing all the packages is a nonsense? > Distros should do this if there is a common interest. In ubuntu it is > a nonsense to have 1 apt-source for 1 program! > > I would rather prefer that cinelerra: > > 0) cinerella runs from its source dir e.g. cd hvirtual;./cinelerra works > > 1) there exists a binary tar - as static as possible > (all "video" libs for sure as static) which you unpack and run. > I notice that cin anyways contains most of libs inside- really good. > > 2) this tar is generated (semi)automatically after each svn revision, > and all > older tars are also preserved. > > I never used any ubuntu packages of cin because they where always too old. > Cin is not in "final shape" and sometimes minor changes matters.... ;-) > > Also it would be nice to be able to use 2 versions at the same time > which is rather > difficult at the moment. .bcast should have also version number, > event like .bcast2.1r945. > > I also never understood why make install "spreads" the program into few > dirs across > my system.... then e.g. running 2 versions is cumbersome. > > Just my 3 cents > > The best > > Marcin > > > _______________________________________________ > Cinelerra mailing list > [email protected] > https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
