Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: atrpms: devel

vlc 2.0

 

 

atrpms devel RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


promac at gmail

Feb 27, 2012, 4:52 AM

Post #1 of 6 (916 views)
Permalink
vlc 2.0

This is my first attempt to create vlc 2.0:

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/vlc-2.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm

Opencv support is broken (maybe I can fix it later) and xcb from rhrel 6 is
too old.
No more mozilla plugin, as far as I know.

A new livemedia is necessary:

configure: WARNING: liveMedia is missing or its installed version is too
old:
Version 2011.12.23 or later is required to proceed.

And a newer libbluray

WARNING: Library libbluray >= 0.2.1 needed for bluray was not found

Therefore, on rhel 6, one should use:

--without opencv --without xcb

on the others, just:

--without opencv

I doubt it will compile on rhel5 ...

In my opinion, this version will not disappoint us.

Can it go to testing?

Thanks.

--
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ


andy-nntp23 at linuxtech

Feb 29, 2012, 9:22 AM

Post #2 of 6 (869 views)
Permalink
Re: vlc 2.0 [In reply to]

Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
>
> No more mozilla plugin, as far as I know.

It's in a separate tarball now:
http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc/2.0.0/npapi-vlc-2.0.0.tar.xz

> Therefore, on rhel 6, one should use:
>
> --without opencv --without xcb

xcb is pretty crucial for X video playback, without it vlc is video playback
is severely limited. Instead the solution I used is including xcb-1.7
statically, which seems to work fine.

See here for my spec-file:
http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/spec-files/vlc.spec

And the source rpm:
http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/source/vlc-2.0.0-2.el6.src.rpm

The binary rpms are under:
http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/i686/
http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/x86_64/


_______________________________________________
atrpms-devel mailing list
atrpms-devel [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-devel


promac at gmail

Feb 29, 2012, 4:53 PM

Post #3 of 6 (871 views)
Permalink
Re: vlc 2.0 [In reply to]

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Andy <andy-nntp23 [at] linuxtech> wrote:

> Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
> >
> > No more mozilla plugin, as far as I know.
>
> It's in a separate tarball now:
> http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc/2.0.0/npapi-vlc-2.0.0.tar.xz
>
> > Therefore, on rhel 6, one should use:
> >
> > --without opencv --without xcb
>
> xcb is pretty crucial for X video playback, without it vlc is video
> playback
> is severely limited. Instead the solution I used is including xcb-1.7
> statically, which seems to work fine.
>
> See here for my spec-file:
> http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/spec-files/vlc.spec
>
> And the source rpm:
> http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/source/vlc-2.0.0-2.el6.src.rpm
>
> The binary rpms are under:
> http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/i686/
> http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/testing/x86_64/
>
>

I upgraded libxcb to 1.7 in rhel6 and F12 and so far so good (sonames are
the same).
Fedora rules are against static links, but on the other I am
upgrading a core package.

Everything is working just fine. This is what I am using now:

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/vlc-2.0.0-1.el6.src.rpm

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/live-2012.02.04-1.fc12.src.rpm

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/libbluray-0.2.1-1.fc14.src.rpm

http://people.atrpms.net/~pcavalcanti/srpms/libxcb-1.7-1.fc14.src.rpm

According to my tests, only dvb-t is broken. The rest is working as
expected.

As you can see, I tested it on old systems, but not on rhel5 yet...


--
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ


andy-nntp23 at linuxtech

Feb 29, 2012, 8:49 PM

Post #4 of 6 (867 views)
Permalink
Re: vlc 2.0 [In reply to]

Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
>
> I upgraded libxcb to 1.7 in rhel6 and F12 and so far so good (sonames are
> the same).
> Fedora rules are against static links, but on the other I am
> upgrading a core package.

Yes, that's exactly the reason why I chose to include xcb statically in vlc
2.0, I think upgrading a core RHEL library like xcb is quite risky and far
less desireable than breaking the no-static-libs rule.


_______________________________________________
atrpms-devel mailing list
atrpms-devel [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-devel


promac at gmail

Feb 29, 2012, 10:36 PM

Post #5 of 6 (870 views)
Permalink
Re: vlc 2.0 [In reply to]

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Arnaldo Russo <andy-nntp23 [at] linuxtech>wrote:

> Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
> >
> > I upgraded libxcb to 1.7 in rhel6 and F12 and so far so good (sonames are
> > the same).
> > Fedora rules are against static links, but on the other I am
> > upgrading a core package.
>
> Yes, that's exactly the reason why I chose to include xcb statically in vlc
> 2.0, I think upgrading a core RHEL library like xcb is quite risky and far
> less desireable than breaking the no-static-libs rule.
>
>
Maybe if we change the test for the minimum libxcb from 1.6 to 1.5 nothing
will change.

This is the changelog for libxcb:

http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/x11-libs/libxcb/ChangeLog?view=markup

I see only bug fixes...

Even if we build using 1.7, vlc installs on systems with 1.5, because
there is no difference whatsoever in the sonames.

--
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ


andy-nntp23 at linuxtech

Mar 1, 2012, 2:04 AM

Post #6 of 6 (858 views)
Permalink
Re: vlc 2.0 [In reply to]

Paulo Cavalcanti wrote:
> Maybe if we change the test for the minimum libxcb from 1.6 to 1.5 nothing
> will change.

I tried that, the build fails. There have been some minor changes in xcb that
are required for vlc 2.0 to build correctly.


_______________________________________________
atrpms-devel mailing list
atrpms-devel [at] atrpms
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-devel

atrpms devel RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.