On 2014-08-19 07:46:02, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Ramacher > <sramac...@debian.org> wrote: > > (Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.) > > > > On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > >> On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > >> > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote : > >> > > I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because > >> > > >> > I remember the idea. > >> > > >> > Basically, the idea was to split so that servers using VLC to do > >> > streaming wouldn't need libX11 and all the rest. > >> > > >> > > otherwise I'd expect the Makefiles to be a bit more helpful with > >> > > determining this. J-B, I'd like you to confirm if I'm right here. > >> > > >> > This idea indeed failed, because libavcodec, one of the main codec > >> > library, can depend on vdpau/vaapi, and both of those acceleration > >> > libraries thought it was cool to use libX11... > >> > Therefore, a vlc-noX wouldn't have avcodec plugin... > >> > > >> > Some other distributions split the VLC free-stack (Xiph formats) > >> > from the rest, for patent reasons. > >> > > >> > For 3rd party programs using libvlc, an idea was to do a vlc-plugins > >> > splitted from vlc, so that they don't get libQt in. > >> > So, something like: > >> > - libvlccore > >> > - libvlc > >> > - vlc-core-plugins > >> > - vlc > >> > >> I'll see if I can come up with something here and prototype a possible > >> split. As soon as I've got something, I'll post a link to a branch. > > > > I've pushed a work-in-progress feature/vlc-plugins branch [1]. vlc-nox > > has been left alive. Looking at the popcon data there seems to be > > interest in the package (vlc: 51349 installs vs. vlc-nox: 53687 > > installs). > > The problem I initially experienced was how to come up with commits > such as > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-multimedia/vlc.git/commit/?h=feature/vlc-plugins&id=3909306d196dff05726cf3c800fa62bf2f8e7ad8 > without spending hours trying to figure out what renames, additions > and removals of vlc plugins happend upstream. I started with a hit and > miss, but after 5 recompilations of VLC *sic* I got tired of failing > builds at package assembly time and started to grep and diff > buildlogs. I am therefore wondering if that effort is really worth the > trouble. I seems that you think it is. OK. Maybe I can come up with > scripts to grep the build logs to streamline this process. > > ... > > The only piece that I'm missing is what Fabian mentioned: A more > declarative way to describe what plugin goes to vlc-nox and what to > vlc. See above.
Yes, that part is really annoying. Thinking about it a little bit more, a script
would be doable. I'll implement something that
1. correctly installs the plugins into vlc and vlc-nox respecting their
dependencies
2. takes a list of plugins that we want to have specifically in vlc (like the
visulization plugins).
I'd like to postpone that until a -3 upload.
> > - Killed vlc-plugin-pulse and moved the PulseAudio plugins to vlc.
> > Xfce, KDE and Gnome all pull in libpulse0 anyway, so I think there is
> > no need for the split.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion on this. I feel that users might
> complain, but we can surely wait for those bug reports to happen (if
> they happen)
In the worst case I'll revert it. But given that vlc depends on libpulse0 (via
libsdl1.2debian) even without intalling vlc-plugin-pulse, I doubt there will be
many complaints (I might be wrong of course).
> Given that vlc is currently in NEW anyway, I guess uploading to
> unstable as 2.2.0~pre2-2 would hurt.
As clarified on IRC, this should haven "wouldn't hurt". I'll upload -2 tonight.
Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
