Bug#203211: RFP: avidemux -- A small editing software for avi (especially DivX)
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Fabian Greffrath <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have checked the rpmfusion package for avidemux and they have patched it
> to use the system libraries for libass, liba52, llibmad and libtwolame at
> least. Furthermore, the package has "BuildRequires: ffmpeg-devel" but I
> could not found a patch to force it to use the system ffmpeg libraries.
I took over mantainership around 2.5.3 so I'm not the original author
of the spec file. Now that I think about it I probably don't need to
BR: ffmpeg-devel but the original maintainer may have begun an attempt
to un-bundle ffmpeg.
> I have put Richard Shaw, the maintainer of this package in rpmfusion into
> CC. Richard, can you tell us more about avidemux' usage of the ffmpeg
> libraries in your package?
As mentioned previously, the bundled ffmpeg is heavily patched. I
doubt if avidemux wasn't grandfathered in during the 3rd party repo
merger that it would pass a review request today since RPM Fusion has
the same policy against bundled libraries as Fedora. I had some luck
un-bundling some of the other libraries as you noticed, but ffmpeg is
I think a lot of the patches for ffmpeg are to maintain "frame
accuracy", this feature has been dropped from the upcoming 2.6 release
(there are pro's and con's to both approaches) and it may be much
easier to un-bundle ffmpeg from this version.
I've already started building preview release packages. The building
is rather odd, I actually have to do a temporary install of
avidemux_core in the %build section so the headers are available for
linking by all the other sub-projects (cli, QT, GTK, plugins, etc.).
I know the build systems differ quite a bit but I would think the
building methodology would sill be the same. Let me know if anyone
would like to take a look and I'll make my spec file available.
I haven't yet taken a look at un-bundling ffmpeg from 2.6 so any help
would be appreciated.