Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Bug#729203: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to
Debian"):
> Le Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 04:29:53PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> > Based purely on security evaluations by others that I was able to find on
> > the web, FFmpeg appears to be
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> Given the amount of software in Debian and thus the amount of security
> fixes necessary for a stable release, I think that the additional
> stable-security uploads for FFmpeg in the order of 10 per release will
> be hardly noticeable.
They are surely noticeable to the s
On 29.07.2014 21:59, Raphael Geissert wrote:
On Tuesday 29 July 2014 18:43:17 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
On 29.07.2014 09:47, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
According to the changelog[1], there have been 8 security updates for
ffmpeg in squeeze.
There would have been more
Y
On Tuesday 29 July 2014 18:43:17 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 29.07.2014 09:47, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> >> According to the changelog[1], there have been 8 security updates for
> >> ffmpeg in squeeze.
> >
> > There would have been more
>
> You're right, my calculat
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun <
andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I don't have an opinion about ffmpeg vs libav, apart from how hard the
>> soname transitions are, especially in ubuntu where we somehow ended up
>> with ex-multimedia packages around that either never
Hi Raphael,
On 29.07.2014 09:47, Raphael Geissert wrote:
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
According to the changelog[1], there have been 8 security updates for
ffmpeg in squeeze.
There would have been more
You're right, my calculation is slightly flawed.
but the code has evolved too much for it t
Hi Dimitri,
On 29.07.2014 03:12, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
I don't have an opinion about ffmpeg vs libav, apart from how hard the
soname transitions are, especially in ubuntu where we somehow ended up
with ex-multimedia packages around that either never were in debian,
or have been long removed
Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> According to the changelog[1], there have been 8 security updates for
> ffmpeg in squeeze.
There would have been more but the code has evolved too much for it to be
feasible to backport the patches. Not to mention that some bugs that are being
fixed are, for example,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2014-07-29 03:20, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> if they are not drop in replacements, and it would also be a
>> pain if
>>> higher up packages link-in both ffmpeg & libav and some
>>> clashing symbols are present...
> This is why the new ffmpeg will use
On 28 July 2014 15:05, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> On 28.07.2014 13:52, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Jul 2014, Norbert Preining wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
In [1], Moritz from the security team clearly stated that he is more
than
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 04:05:46PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> On 28.07.2014 13:52, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >On Mon, 28 Jul 2014, Norbert Preining wrote:
> >>On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >>>In [1], Moritz from the security team clearly stated that he is more
> >
On 28.07.2014 13:52, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
In [1], Moritz from the security team clearly stated that he is more
than uncomfortable with having more than one copy of libavcodec in
debian/testin
On 28.07.2014 13:24, Alessio Treglia wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:12 PM, "IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)"
wrote:
Except that, for a lot of the depending packages, there would be an
immediate benefit in the number of bugs fixed.
at least in theory.
Plus I would definitely appreciate
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:12 PM, "IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)"
wrote:
>> Except that, for a lot of the depending packages, there would be an
>> immediate benefit in the number of bugs fixed.
>
> at least in theory.
Plus I would definitely appreciate to see some bug stats supporting
such a t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
personally i would welcome if both libav and ffmpeg could co-exist
within Debian¹.
as i see it, libav and ffmpeg have diverged, and as such i would like
to have the choice which one to use.
On 2014-07-28 11:55, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 28, Ales
Hi Julien,
On 28.07.2014 10:44, Julien Cristau wrote:
It remains to be seen, what the release team prefers: frustrated users and
developers or both forks in jessie.
The release team is likely to let the people involved in multimedia foo
fight it out among themselves and pick a winner.
I am n
On Jul 28, Alessio Treglia wrote:
> Personally I don't feel like dropping libav in favor of ffmpeg now at
> this stage. It's too late for Jessie.
Except that, for a lot of the depending packages, there would be an
immediate benefit in the number of bugs fixed.
Personally I feel that we have inf
Ciao,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> The release team is likely to let the people involved in multimedia foo
> fight it out among themselves and pick a winner. We're not going to
> ship both and hand that mess over to the security team.
Personally I don't feel like dro
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 03:39:29 +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> On 28.07.2014 02:05, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
> > wrote:
> >
> >> * Does it make sense for me to switch my package?
> >>The rule of thumb is, if your upstr
Hi Reinhard,
On 28.07.2014 02:05, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
* Does it make sense for me to switch my package?
The rule of thumb is, if your upstream uses FFmpeg for development
you probably want to switch to using it, too.
In
20 matches
Mail list logo
