Is there a reason why there are not any fedora packages (that I can find anyway) for totem and xine-libs?
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 06:48, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Is there a reason why there are not any fedora packages (that I can find anyway) for totem and xine-libs?
-- Cheap Linux CD's - http://mpeters.us/linux/
Eh? Freshrpms has them.
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:58, Chris Kloiber wrote:
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 06:48, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Is there a reason why there are not any fedora packages (that I can find anyway) for totem and xine-libs?
-- Cheap Linux CD's - http://mpeters.us/linux/
Eh? Freshrpms has them.
Yes but they are not fedora and sometimes their repository conflicts with fedora repositories - as he sometimes updates versions and stuff.
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:01:14 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:58, Chris Kloiber wrote:
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 06:48, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Is there a reason why there are not any fedora packages (that I can find anyway) for totem and xine-libs?
Eh? Freshrpms has them.
Yes but they are not fedora and sometimes their repository conflicts with fedora repositories - as he sometimes updates versions and stuff.
That's why there is http://rpm.livna.org
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 16:14, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:01:14 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:58, Chris Kloiber wrote:
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 06:48, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Is there a reason why there are not any fedora packages (that I can find anyway) for totem and xine-libs?
Eh? Freshrpms has them.
Yes but they are not fedora and sometimes their repository conflicts with fedora repositories - as he sometimes updates versions and stuff.
That's why there is http://rpm.livna.org
I am aware that they are available from a number of places. I am curious as to why they are not with Fedora - which was my original question - not where to get them (google or rpmfind would have done that)
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:01:31 -0700, Michael A. Peters mpeters@mac.com wrote:
I am aware that they are available from a number of places. I am curious as to why they are not with Fedora - which was my original question - not where to get them (google or rpmfind would have done that)
I think the webpage at http://rpm.livna.org explains the situation quite succinctly, in the very first sentence. If you need a more detailed analysis of why totem and other packages were considered problematic for fedora.us to continue to house, you will probably only be satisfied with an essay directly from someone in Red Hat's legal department...which i would not hold my breathe for. It's best to think of livna as effectively the non-US or freeworld extention of fedora.us.
-jef
On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 18:50, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:01:31 -0700, Michael A. Peters mpeters@mac.com wrote:
I am aware that they are available from a number of places. I am curious as to why they are not with Fedora - which was my original question - not where to get them (google or rpmfind would have done that)
I think the webpage at http://rpm.livna.org explains the situation quite succinctly
OK - I wasn't aware there were legal issues with xine-lib and totem. I know there is for xvidcore - but you can build xine-lib without it, and libdvdcss also isn't required (unless you want to watch commercial DVD's).
So there are legal issues beyond those packages? That sucks.
Michael A. Peters wrote:
OK - I wasn't aware there were legal issues with xine-lib and totem. I know there is for xvidcore - but you can build xine-lib without it, and libdvdcss also isn't required (unless you want to watch commercial DVD's).
So there are legal issues beyond those packages? That sucks.
Well, IANAL but as far as I have understood basically anything coming off of Red Hat's servers would have to be a pretty broken product. As you said, it wouldn't play commercial DVDs, it essentially wouldn't play any downloadable files etc. In short, it would be pretty useless and it wouldn't be fixable with plug-ins that could be downloaded (you'd need a full new copy of Xine) so really there's no use in shipping it - its only function would be to fill the mailing lists and Bugzilla with complaints that it doesn't work, and get a bunch of not-so-clued-in reviewers to write that "Fedora sucks since they broke everything media".
Pretty much the only hope of "fixing" this situation (other than the real solution of scrapping the DMCA and getting rid of software patents) is GStreamer, which is designed to be runtime-pluggable. Totem with a GStreamer backend supporting the Ogg formats (ogg vorbis, flac and speex for audio, Theora for video when it's done...) could be a basic video/media player (yeah, I know about the discussion that audio and video players are different and I agree); probably a plug-in for unencrypted DVDs would be reasonably easy to craft too if it doesn't exist. In order to get "real" DVD playing and other stuff to work one could just add a plugin. Likely fake plugins that pop up windows informing about why the formats are not supported in the base distribution would be needed to stem the flood of list e-mails but this would be a much less annoying situation than the current one.
The reason that this can't be done just yet is pretty much that AFAIK the GStreamer backend for Totem isn't really considered done, and since the Ogg Theora bitstream spec isn't finished there really isn't any sane unencumbered video format around so Totem would basically have nothing to play.
/Per