Re: MPlayer revisited
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 05:34:02PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Diego Biurrun <diego@biurrun.de> wrote:
> > Yes, but as outlined below, it's not different from other multimedia
> > players wrt patents.
>
> Bugs in some package already in debian doesn't let another package
> with those bugs in as a right, though. It just means we have bugs
> to deal with.
Yes. Still Debian's position needs to be consistent and credible as
well. If MPlayer has problem X and therefore cannot enter Debian, then
the other multimedia players sharing problem X would have to be removed,
wouldn't they?
> I'm not quite sure what sort of statement about patents will
> convince ftpmasters. Maybe knowing what patents held by who are
> definitely infringed by mplayer is good, especially if none of
> them are actively enforced, or maybe it is bad. Maybe just
> knowing that no mplayer distributors are currently threatened
> is enough,
No MPlayer distributors are currently threatened, nor have they been in
the past.
> or maybe nothing mplayer team will be good enough and
> we need to get a lawyerly opinion.
Sorry, I don't understand this sentence, could you please clarify?
> I hate software patents too.
We all do *sigh*.
> > > My summary of the issue is http://people.debian.org/~mjr/mplayer
> > Nice summary. One point is not fully correct, though:
> > 2. DeCSS code: removed and mplayer-debian uses libdvdread3 instead
> > libdvdread is not a replacement for libdvdcss. Instead of using the builtin
> > libdvdcss the Debian package dynamically loads a libdvdcss that might be
> > present on the system in question.
>
> So libdvdread3 is used anyway, or have I misunderstood?
MPlayer includes both libdvdcss and libdvdread in the libmpdvdkit2
directory. IIRC Andrea removed it and decided to link to the Debian
libdvdread dynamically.
Diego
Reply to: