Bug#729203: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

[Andreas Cadhalpun]

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 from testing and/or unstable.

There are only 6 additional reverse-build-dependencies of src:libav in 
utopic. Two build against lib*-ffmpeg-dev without further changes, one 
needs a simple patch to use pkg-config, one needs a patch to adapt to 
newer API (also needed for Libav 10), one is BD-uninstallable and one 
fails for unrelated reasons, but its build-dependencies on libav*-dev 
seem to be unnecessary anyway.

Per package list:

alsa-plugins-extra: OK
bombono-dvd: PATCH CodecID
dvdstyler: Unmet build dependencies: libwxsvg-dev (>= 2:1.0.9)
gstreamer-vaapi: error: unsupported GStreamer API version 1.4
kffmpegthumbnailer: OK
libdlna: PATCH pkg-config

The patches are attached to this mail.

> Thankfully, we
> have worked to make sure libav is in universe only and thus is not a
> security maintenance burden. Nonetheless, libav10 transition is still
> not complete in utopic today.

Is bombono-dvd the last blocker?

> I haven't checked, but now abi
> compatible/incompatible the two stacks are? cause it would be a pain
> 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...

As Marco already wrote, FFmpeg is packaged to be ABI incompatible with 
Libav, having different sonames and different symbol versions.

> and people start requesting to have build
> variants against both.

This could theoretically be done, but I don't think anyone wants to 
maintain such a thing, especially because it would need two different 
source packages, as the development packages of FFmpeg and Libav have to 
conflict.

> Has a rebuild of all deps been done? How many
> build failures there are? (On both debian & ubuntu, ideally) Is
> hardening flags / toolchain enabled in both, or either of the two?

I did a rebuild of all the reverse-build-dependencies in sid and the 
results can be found in my original mail.
For Ubuntu, see the beginning of this mail.

I'm not sure what you want to know about hardening.
The packages are otherwise unchanged, so use hardening flags if they 
already do.
If that question was about FFmpeg/Libav, then yes, FFmpeg uses 
--toolchain=hardened and Libav hardening flags.

Best regards,
Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bombono-dvd_CodecID.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1964 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20140729/a7147139/attachment.patch>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: libdlna_pkg-config.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1868 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20140729/a7147139/attachment-0001.patch>