<p>FYI, here is Christian's latest response.</p>
<p>~ Andres</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: "Christian Marillat" <<a href="mailto:marillat@free.fr">marillat@free.fr</a>><br>Date: Mar 23, 2012 11:09 AM<br>Subject: Re: Duplicate Packages from Debian archive in DMO<br>
To: <<a href="mailto:dmo-discussion@debian-multimedia.org">dmo-discussion@debian-multimedia.org</a>><br><br type="attribution"><div class="quoted-text">Andres Mejia <<a href="mailto:amejia004@gmail.com">amejia004@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
> On Mar 22, 2012 11:29 AM, "Christian Marillat" <<a href="mailto:marillat@free.fr">marillat@free.fr</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Andres Mejia <<a href="mailto:amejia004@gmail.com">amejia004@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br>
>><br>
>> > On Mar 21, 2012 2:26 AM, "Christian Marillat" <<a href="mailto:marillat@free.fr">marillat@free.fr</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Andres Mejia <<a href="mailto:amejia004@gmail.com">amejia004@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
</div><div class="quoted-text">>> >> Also some pakcages like vlc or xine are in my repository because Debian<br>
>> >> added a conflicts against libavutil51 from my repository.<br>
>><br>
>> [...]<br>
>><br>
>> > I looked at the packaging for vlc and xine-lib. I don't see a place where a<br>
>> > conflicts to any libav/ffmpeg libraries was added.<br>
>><br>
>> ,----<br>
>> | $ apt-cache show libpostproc52<br>
>> | Package: libpostproc52<br>
>> | Source: libav<br>
>> | Version: 4:0.8.1-1<br>
>> | Installed-Size: 403<br>
>> | Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers <<a href="mailto:pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org">pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org</a>><br>
>> | Architecture: i386<br>
>> | Depends: libavutil51 (>= 4:0.8.1-1) | libavutil-extra-51 (>= 4:0.8.1), libavutil51 (<< 4:0.8.1-99) | libavutil-extra-51 (<< 4:0.8.1.99), libc6 (>= 2.4)<br>
>> `----<br>
>><br>
>> Could you explain the "libavutil51 (<< 4:0.8.1-99) | libavutil-extra-51 (<< 4:0.8.1.99)"<br>
>> in Depends field ?<br>
><br>
> You're looking at the strict dependencies set only for the libav<br>
> packages. The shlibs is generated again so that the Depends field<br>
> above does not apply to any packages depending on the libav libraries.<br>
> See vlc for example.<br>
<br>
</div>vlc-nox, libxine2-ffmpeg and libxine1-ffmpeg depends on libpostproc52<br>
and installing libpostproc52 from Debian remove these packages :<br>
<br>
,----<br>
| LANG=C sudo apt-get install libpostproc52=4:0.8.1-1<br>
| Reading package lists... Done<br>
| Building dependency tree<br>
| Reading state information... Done<br>
| The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer<br>
| required:<br>
| libva-x11-1 libxcb-keysyms1 libresid-builder0c2a libxcb-xv0 libtar0<br>
| libxcb-xfixes0 libcddb2 libwebp2 libdvbpsi7 libdirac-decoder0 libqtcore4<br>
| libupnp3 libxcb-randr0 libxcb-composite0 libiso9660-7 libsidplay2<br>
| libqtgui4 libaudio2 libvcdinfo0 libebml3 libmatroska5 libsdl-image1.2<br>
| Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove them.<br>
| The following extra packages will be installed:<br>
| libavcodec-extra-53 libavutil-extra-51<br>
| Suggested packages:<br>
| libfaad0<br>
| The following packages will be REMOVED:<br>
| ffmpeg libavcodec53 libavdevice53 libavfilter2 libavformat53 libavutil51<br>
| libswresample0 libswscale2<br>
`----<br>
<br>
[...]<br>
<div class="quoted-text"><br>
>> > Speaking of libav/ffmpeg, the Debian archive has libav and not ffmpeg. I see that<br>
>> > DMO is the reverse, shipping ffmpeg instead of libav. This of course resulted in<br>
>> > many breakages between packages in Debian and packages in DMO.<br>
>><br>
>> Which breakage ? Tell me what is exactly broken.<br>
><br>
> Here are some of the more recent reported problems with using dmo.<br>
><br>
> 1. <a href="http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=663893" target="_blank">http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=663893</a><br>
<br>
</div>The latest comment in the bug report is from the Debian maintainer :<br>
<br>
<a href="http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=663893#139" target="_blank">http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=663893#139</a><br>
<br>
,----<br>
| On a test installation running debian-multimedia here moc works fine,<br>
`----<br>
<br>
Works also fine for me.<br>
<div class="quoted-text"><br>
> 2. <a href="http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2012-March/025352.html" target="_blank">http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2012-March/025352.html</a><br>
> # read the quoted message<br>
> 3. <a href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/03/msg00129.html" target="_blank">http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/03/msg00129.html</a><br>
><br>
> About 2 and 3, I can personally attest that this kind of breakage with<br>
> using dmo does happen. Years ago when I first switched to Debian, I<br>
> too thought that using dmo would be alright, seeing that it should<br>
> only provide missing codecs and other software not available in Debian<br>
> at the time. Long story short, after certain packages were upgraded<br>
> because of dmo being activated on my system, I was left with numerous<br>
> package conflicts and a missing desktop environment (in my case, kde).<br>
<br>
</div>2 thread started with a newbie Debian user who don't understand how Debian<br>
packaging and just saying as I'm unable to downgrade a packages dmo<br>
shouldn't exist.<br>
<br>
3 is message from angry people who are only saying dmo is crap<br>
without doing any example.<br>
<br>
[...]<br>
<div class="quoted-text"><br>
>> Could you tell me why I should move to libav ? I'm packaging ffmpeg for<br>
>> 11 years and I'm happy with that.<br>
><br>
> If you're comfortable packaging ffmpeg, then packaging libav should be<br>
> no problem to you at all. One of the main reasons cited for why Debian<br>
> (and Ubuntu) went with libav was because it would offer more<br>
> stability, something desirable with respect to maintaining a distro<br>
> such as Debian. See this link.<br>
> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-May/000891.html" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-May/000891.html</a><br>
<br>
</div>Already read. I think here is a conflict of interest. I'm sure if<br>
Reinhard Tartler wasn't the libav release manager, we are not talking<br>
about libav in Debian but instead ffmpeg.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Christian<br>
<br>
</font></div>