mpg123 not included, why?

[Tim]

Allegedly, on or about 11 January 2016, Fernando Cassia sent:
> Call me old fashioned, but I prefer a static, single binary to perform
> a simple task like playing a mp3 file - you know, the Unix way, do one
> thing and do it self-cointained.

There's some logic to that, but all some illogic.  Would you have yet
another binary program to play wav files, another for oggs, another for
flac, and have to call the right one for each audio file you want to
play?  Or would you use the one player for any type of audio file, and
let it make use of the appropriate codec for the file?

The idea of having a common codec for handling, say mp3 files, has merit
in itself, along the lines you're promoting for the binary player.  If
half a dozen programs all use the same codec file, that's more people
debugging and improving a codec.

Personally, I think that there's far too many different types of media
file to have a single binary player that handles them all.  There would
be poorly supported ones that coders didn't really place much priority
on.  And I certainly wouldn't want to have to use a plethora of
different binary players for each different audio filetype.

-- 
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64

Boilerplate:  All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.

Linux servers are always being dæmonised...