[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Thread Index]
RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Re: mplayer binary
- From: Alex Bligh <alex@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 11:04:48 +0100
- Subject: RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Re: mplayer binary
--On 11 June 2006 09:48 +0100 Charles Moir <CharlesM@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Alex said :
.... though if you are happy with ogg, it's free,
and free in a manner such that even Debian are happy ( :-) ),
and is thus around by default on all modern distributions as
far as I know.
It's the ffmpeg codec we require, specifically the h.264 video codec
part, that I'm more concerned about.
I'm sort of surprised that worked out of the box for your distribution
(Dapper is it?) or any distribution for that matter.
Is there a way we can ensure specific codecs are installed? I sort of
assumed the normal package dependency mechanisms would not work just for
codecs, but perhaps that's wrong?
The only reason they wouldn't work is if the CODECs weren't available as a
package. For instance, if they might be in Multiverse but not Universe and
Multiverse might not be selected. But if the reason why they were not in
Base/Universe etc. was IPR related then from a Debian/Ubuntu point of view
you'd have a problem anyway, as you couldn't ship them as part of our
package and get them into Base, and obviously a package in Base can't
depend on something that's not in Base.
IE if the dependency is soluble, packages will fix it.
And when you say your default mplayer worked but he shipped one didn't,
do you mean the platform provided mplayer worked (is it standard?) and
the one we shipped did not?
I mean the Dapper distribution provided mplayer worked fine (I'm pretty
sure it's standard, yes - if not installed by default then available
by default); and the one you shipped did not work at all. Clearly I'm
not running a virgin Dapper install (I've pulled in a pile of stuff)
so conceivably something might have pulled in some additional mplayer
codecs, but I can't recall doing anything that might have caused this