[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mumble and celt, #682010, TC


The problem is one of compatibility; the reason the mumble tarball
includes CELT 0.7.1 is that it's our one "common codec" supported on all
platforms. Long-term, Mumble is being migrated to Opus, but while the
code for that is ready in current git head of Mumble, it will be a long
time before everyone is on that version. We still have a large portion
of users on our previous major release, which is close to two years old now.

At the same time, upstream for CELT has stated that they are not
updating it. That's fine. Slightly more worrying is the statement that
there *may* be security problems, and that they are not interested in
fixing them since CELT 0.7.1 is ancient. Based on that statement, the
correct solution is probably to deprecate the stand-alone package of
celt; we don't want new packages to start using it.

For now, the easiest is probably to re-enable Mumble to build the
embedded CELT, something it currently does not do. That way it is just a
single package, and we can deal with problems as they come up. Mikkel
Krautz, another Mumble developer, has some proof-of-concept code to
sandbox CELT using seccomp. If the CELT in Mumble was stand-alone, we
could apply this sandboxing to the local copy we have there. It is
another of the "not ready yet" solutions, but if it is needed, it will
be much easier to retrofit this inside Mumble itself than it would be to
do it in a global package.


On 7/19/12 9:59 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> The context is the problems with mumble and celt, which have been
> referred to the Technical Committee (of which I'm a member).
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: mumble and celt, #682010, TC"):
>> So in summary, the conclusion seems to be:
>>  * If we cannot find a maintainer for celt who looks like they'll be
>>    able to handle it for the lifetime of wheezy then we need to allow
>>    the current mumble (and perhaps other rdepends) in sid to propagate
>>    and will then be able to remove celt from wheezy.
> Thorvald: you are listed as the maintainer for mumble, along with Ron.
> Patrick: you seem to have been involved in mumble recently.  
> Ron evidently has no interest in maintaining celt in wheezy, and we
> need a maintainer for the celt package so that wheezy's mumble will
> interoperate properly.
> I see that the mumble package itself has embedded copies of various
> versions of celt.  Are either of you happy to maintain the
> non-embedded celt 0.7.1 package in wheezy as well ?
> Do you need co-maintainers, sponsors, etc. ?
> Thanks,
> Ian.

Reply to: