the current xine-lib maintainer speaking. :-)
The Xine project:
has recently released a new major version, version 1.2.0.
Unfortunately, among the list of changes:
there are these new "features":
* Use libavutil-provided implementations for CRC, SHA1 and BASE64 algorithms,
this makes use of libavutil even outside the FFmpeg decoding plugin,
but avoid duplication of algorithms between different plugins.
* Use av_mallocz() when xine_xmalloc_aligned() wouldn't be needed.
* FFmpeg is now required as an external dependency; if you want to build
xine-lib from source, please download a copy of FFmpeg from their SVN
which basically mean that xine-lib now has a global, non-optional dependency
on FFmpeg's libavutil library.
So there are 4 possible ways forward:
(a) Stick with 1.1.x forever. I don't think that's a good idea in the long
run, upstream won't be providing security fixes for the old branch forever.
(b) Package libavutil (and only libavutil) from FFmpeg in Fedora. (I don't
think libavutil, as opposed to libavcodec, is actually patent-encumbered,
though that'd also have to be checked.) The issue there is that FFmpeg
upstream obviously doesn't support this. It would need some more black
packaging magic of the kind already done in xine-lib, and more legal
auditing. I don't think I want to investigate going down that road.
(c) Bundle parts or all of libavutil with xine-lib. Yuck!!!
(d) Move the whole thing (back) to RPM Fusion (where it originally was, before
we started needing xine-lib for Amarok and Phonon, which both no longer
use it). It would go to the Free section, of course.
My proposal is to go with (d).
The following packages currently depend on xine-lib:
* (k9copy – already in RPM Fusion, not affected)
* kaffeine (my package, the reason why I maintain xine-lib in the first place)
These packages would have to move to RPM Fusion along with xine-lib.
In Kaffeine's case, upstream is switching from xine-lib to MPlayer in their git
repository, so it will likely have to move to RPM Fusion sooner or later
anyway. This means the affected packages are basically *xine*.
So my plan is to retire (for my packages, resp. have the respective maintainer
retire) the listed packages in Fedora for Fedora ≥ 17 and get (or have the
respective maintainer get) them into RPM Fusion Free instead. (I'd take care
of xine-lib and kaffeine myself, I hope the maintainers of the other packages
will take care of them.)
2011-06-23 : FTBFS not responded to
2010-06-30 : -static packaging bug not responded to
Plus, release 0.89 from 20-May-2011 is available whereas Fedora contains
0.84 from 2010 ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/courier/files/cone/ ).
This looks like somebody with interest in Cone should sign up as
co-maintainer and find out what's up with the current maintainer.
Fedora release 16 (Verne) - Linux 3.1.1-2.fc16.x86_64
loadavg: 0.82 1.09 0.87
I have no more time to support the following packages in the Fedora.
jack-audio-connection-kit -- The Jack Audio Connection Kit
klamav -- Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop
man-pages-uk -- Ukrainian man pages from the Linux Documentation Project
python-alsa -- Python binding for the ALSA library
qstat -- Real-time Game Server Status for FPS game servers
uniconvertor -- Universal vector graphics translator
With Best Regards,
Please be aware that since the most recent systemd uploads /tmp is now
in tmpfs by default in Rawhide/F18.
For details please see this feature page:
If you have an explicit /tmp entry in fstab things should continue to
work the same as before. If you don't then you will now get a tmpfs on
/tmp by default.
This will most likely lead to a problem or two with software that isn't
happy about /tmp being small. We have created a tracker bug to keep
track of this:
If you have identified a bug that is triggered by /tmp being on tmpfs
now, please add it to this tracker bug!
For a bit of background on all of this and recommendations for
developers, please see:
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
looks like PyXML package is deprecated since python itself provides xml
When you look deeper,
python's xml provides:
"dom", "parsers", "sax", "etree"
and PyXML provides:
'dom', 'marshal', 'parsers', 'sax', 'schema', 'utils', 'xpath', 'xslt'
So, PyXML duplicates dom, parsers and sax (and looks like python's is in
better shape). Is any package using marshall, schema or any other not in
Deprecate PyXML or just remove duplicated parts?
Most of you aware regarding liberation license problem we are facing from
long time. Looks like time came when we can get rid of it.
Google has recently released google-croscore fonts.
- These are from same vendor ascendar with OFL license and more glyph
coverage than existing liberation.
- Existing shape in liberation and same as croscore since from the
- Use base of croscore fonts and apply enhancements available in
liberation and call new entity liberation 2.0
1. Liberation license issues will get resolved
2. Liberation user community will get enhanced fonts. i.e. more language
Need help from legal for doing licensing stuff, dunno how we can crack
licensing of Liberation SansNarrow.
it seems to be the right time to do an unification/reorganization of
Oracle (Berkeley) DB packages in rawhide. The current situation is that
there are three of them:
compat-db - shipping old libdbs for compatibility (4.5,4.6 and 4.7)
db4 - shipping latest 4.x libdb series (4.8)
libdb - shipping latest libdb release (5.3)
What I'm planning to do is getting rid of db4 package. But before that
I want to clean-up compat-db for a bit.
After fiddling a bit with repoquery nothing seems to be dependent on
libdb-4.5 so if there are no objections I want to remove it.
There was only one package dependent on 4.6 (squidGuard) because it
had compilation problems with 4.7. This package is now built against
5.3 with no problem so 4.6 could go away from compat-db as well.
Only one package (pam_abl-0:0.2.3-8.fc12) was dependent on 4.7
in Fedora 17 but it's already rebuilt in rawhide so 4.7 can go away as
So the plan is:
1) remove 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 from compat-db
2) put 4.8 to compat-db
3) make db4 a dead package
(db4 package name is not very descriptive any more as we have
The reason I'm sending this to fedora-devel is that I'm unable to
reveal dlopen() or similar deps in packages so if your package
requires older libdb I plan to remove and can not be rebuilt against
newer libdb then please speak up!
Jindrich Novy <jnovy(a)redhat.com> http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/
Kdo víno má a nepije, kdo hrozny má a nejí je, kdo ženu má a nelíbá,
kdo zábavě se vyhýbá, na toho vemte bič a hůl, to není člověk, to je vůl.
--- Jan Werich