On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:30:20 -0200 Rogério Brito <rbr...@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> Hi, Celejar. > > On 12/13/2009 11:59 PM, Celejar wrote: > > The package 'libx264-78' is installed on my (Sid) system: > > This package provides the x264 video encoder/decoder (an implementation of the > part 10 of the MPEG 4 standard, also known as H.264). ... > Theora is a very good alternative, especially now that it is in version 1.1 (and > it is available in Debian's archive---I helped put the theora packages in > shape > from the 1.0 to the 1.1 version and I am glad that it now has a new, competent > maintainer). Thanks for the very detailed and clear explanation (and thanks for your work on Theora), but I'm not sure I understand why this is a hard dependency. I see why I'd definitely want this on my system, but since mplayer can be used to watch video that doesn't use this codec, shouldn't it be a mere 'recommends'? > OK, but this only touches the subject that you brought us. > > > Aptitude shows it in the 'Obsolete and Locally Created Packages' > > section. When I try to upgrade the system, aptitude (initially) > > suggests that I keep this package, but whenever I accept the > > suggestion, the package's status of 'automatically installed' goes > > away, and it becomes marked as manually installed (which is certainly > > not what I want, since I have no idea what the thing is - I just want > > mplayer to be happy). > > I hope that, now, you have a clearer idea of what the package does (and why it > is important). > > I am not familiar with the internals of aptitude dependency resolver---so, > this > is only a guess: I would say that the package gets marked as manually > installed > since you manually chose to keep it by the resolver. I am really not sure on > this paragraph. But as I explained (in the part of my message cited below), this doesn't generally happen when I follow aptitude's suggestions about not upgrading packages. For example, just now when I told aptitude to upgrade, it suggested that I keep 'esound-common' at its current version. I accepted, and the package is still marked as automatically installed. > > This doesn't seem to happen to most packages - > > does this have anything to do with the fact that it's 'obsolete' (i.e., > > currently not available in the archives)? Is this a bug? > > The package, as you discovered, is marked as obsolete when it is not in the > archive anymore (gee, let me see which version of libx264 that I have > here---that is libx264-79). > > You can get rid of the package if you just recompile mplayer with a newer > libx264 (you can get those from Christian Marillat's repository---well, > actually, you can grab the "unstable" version of his packages, most of the > time). Thanks again for the detailed explanations! Celejar -- foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
