This bug was fixed in the package faac - 1.28-0ubuntu1
---
faac (1.28-0ubuntu1) oneiric; urgency=low
* New upstream release. Package based on Debian Multimedia team git.
(LP: #395902)
* debian/copyright documents all applicable licenses. The package as a whole
is not LGPL
** Changed in: ubuntu-community
Status: New = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
Title:
Libfaac not LGPL
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
This explanation makes sense to me, thanks for working on it!
Unfortunately, this won't help with bug #412063, but that's life.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
Title:
Libfaac
Based on discussion in today's Technical Board meeting, and the content
of this bug, we understand the root issue to be, in summary:
There appears to be code in libfaac which (as an exception to the
prevailing license) is more restrictive than LGPL.
Accordingly, the following actions should be
subscribing the tech board to this bug. It seems the archive
administrators still wait on confirmation/input.
Any status update? Should this package be promoted to universe or
removed from the archive?
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification
** Also affects: ubuntu-community
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ubuntu-community
Assignee: (unassigned) = Ubuntu Technical Board (techboard)
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member
@archive-admins: Can you please give a status update on this bug?
AFAIUI, this package should either be removed or promoted to universe.
multiverse is clearly the wrong place for this, as we the problems are
redistributability matters, not licensing. If I got this wrong, please
correct me.
--
On Fri, 28 May 2010 06:01:30 -, Reinhard Tartler siret...@tauware.de
wrote:
@archive-admins: Can you please give a status update on this bug?
The techboard deemed the packages suitable for release with lucid.
AFAIUI, this package should either be removed or promoted to universe.
Reinhard,
I looked at the current ffmpeg tree and found that the aacenc can now be
enabled.
http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/Makefile
Would it be possible to backport this to the the 0.5 branch (and thus
patch current Debian/Ubuntu packages accordingly) or do users have to
Perhaps the interim solution to this is to have an additional,
alternative ffmpeg package that is automatically built upon
installation, eg. make-ffmpeg-nonfree-package. It works for Google
Earth.
Although it's a slightly clunky way of solving the issue, and there are
many build dependancies,
I'd love that option, Chrisfu. I'd be glad for anything that can make
getting the nonfree ffmpeg codecs available to me.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
Although it's a slightly clunky way of solving the issue, and there are
many build dependancies, it'll keep the functionality in Ubuntu
Why not just contact medibuntu and ask for a binary distribution with
all the non-free license-arguable extras? I think that they already
have packages of
Maybe I misunderstand it, but who knows if it a license conflict for sure?
Nobody here seems to know it.
And are it valid in the rest of the world outside japan and USA?
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
As you can see here it are different in different countries in this matter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#United_States
So before you remove anything is better to be 100% sure.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because
Hans, software patent and software license are NOT the same.
Read the post above yours by James :)
On 4/4/10, Hans henrik_nerg...@hotmail.com wrote:
As you can see here it are different in different countries in this matter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#United_States
So before
This things are not easy. But I think it not Ubuntu developers job to make
Ubuntu difficult to the ordinary PC user and helping Microsoft to find out
everything for them.
If this bug report was not written had anyone ever noticed and think about it
at all? And as Hans told maybe it are only
There are differents approaches in licenses to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_licence#Software_licenses_and_copyright_law
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
If you remove all codecs you just forcing people to go over to Linux Mint, who
works out of the box:
http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php
Why not do a special Ubuntu for USA and Japan and then the rest of the
world can use a Ubuntu with all mediacodecs like Mint doing?After all
most countries
On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 07:58:20 -, Hans henrik_nerg...@hotmail.com wrote:
If you remove all codecs you just forcing people to go over to Linux Mint,
who works out of the box:
http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php
Why not do a special Ubuntu for USA and Japan and then the rest of the
world
Do we have an agreement here that libfaac is getting removed from 10.04?
If yes then I will upload new revision of gst-plugins-bad-multiverse0.10
with libfaac-dev build-dep removed.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a
nearly all of them only use aac optionally and can be fixed to not build
aganst libfaac.
removing faac will annoy our users pretty badly, since it is the most
common way to create AAC audio. I hope that removing it will motivate
(more) people to contribute to ffaac, ffmpeg's internal AAC encoder,
Is the internal codec, ffaac, going to be included with 10.04 ffmpeg? I
mean, is there going to an alternative solution provided?
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
with 10.04 ffmpeg
I mean with ubuntu 10.04 ffmpeg package
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
10.04 will ship ffmpeg 0.5, which does not include an aac encoder.
if libfaac is removed, ubuntu 10.04 will not contain any useable AAC
encoder.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Yes! Great idea! Lets forget all about it just works. Lets
annoy/piss-off/confuse/break hundreds if not thousands of unaware end-users
by including, without knowledge or consent, into our little battle to
further our cause. Thank you for for deciding that we should all be part of
some little
Just to check, is everyone in agreement that in order to remove libfaac,
the ffmpeg decoder would have to be included? Otherwise I predict some
pretty serious fallout.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Tom, libfaac is a pure encoder. This has nothing to do with libfaad,
which is an decoder for which I'm not aware of licensing issues so far.
libfaac on the other hand...
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Just to check, is everyone in agreement that in order to remove libfaac,
the ffmpeg decoder would have to be included? Otherwise I predict some
pretty serious fallout.
I bet the answer would be maybe as a backport. :)
@Jim, the unaware end-users (like you and me) have been informed:
either seek out a solution with nero[1] [...]
[1] http://www.nero.com/enu/technologies-aac-codec.html
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
Ohh yeah and it's free one too.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
So, by my reading this makes libfaac undistributable, due to the conflict
between
the LGPL and this license, as well as possible ambiguity as to whether we would
even be able to use the code under the original license (do we claim[...]
conformance
to the MPEG-2 NBC/ MPEG-4 Audio standards?)
another license review on the ffmpeg mailing list:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/103514
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
For the impatient, add the following line to your medibuntu repo list.
deb http://packages.medibuntu.org/ karmic-staging free non-free
And ONLY for the impatient. You should be willing to test if nothing
breaks and report back if it does. Otherwise wait one week and use
karmic instead of
Lionel Le Folgoc made this comment, and submitted a number of libavcodec
packages that include faac support.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/medibuntu/+bug/490227/comments/1
For the impatient, add the following line to your medibuntu repo list.
deb http://packages.medibuntu.org/ karmic-staging free
Soos Gergely wrote:
I already waited almost one full month; if I have to wait
God knows how much more time can at least someone explain to me in
layman's terms why isn't there a medibuntu package?
I would say this part is easy. Probably because nobody has requested the
Medibuntu maintainers
Thank you very much Paul, I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
subscribing ubuntu archive administrators:
could you please review the legal status of the faac package?
In the meantime I've found this statement on the upstream homepage:
http://www.audiocoding.com/faac.html
quote
FAAC is based on the original ISO MPEG reference code. The changes to this code
Is anyone paying attention to this issue anymore?
As I already mentioned in bug 412063 I would need the aac because the only
other alternative audio codec my phone supports is amr which delivers
unacceptable audio quality.
Maybe I'm too dumb but I can't understand why can't there be an ffmpeg in
I wanted to do a bump on this to see if Upstream has taken any look at
this. Who are we to assign this to for someone to look at it?
--
Libfaac not LGPL
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/374900
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
This is complete and utter nonesense. The referred code needs to be re-
instigated immediately. If the alleged IP owners ask for it to be
removed then it should be.. otherwise, why is it being pre-emptively
censored and on who's authority?
Even if patent/copyright exists - there are hundreds of
Just an example of an attempt to use libfaac with ffmpeg:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/412063
Please help us sort this out, so this will be available for Ubuntu users.
Depending on the actual outcome for the LGPL licensing, shouldn't this at least
be set up for people using non-free (ex
Affected files:
- libfaac/bitstream.c
- libfaac/tns.c
- libfaac/tns.h
copyright notice:
This software module was originally developed by
and edited by Texas Instruments in the course of
development of the MPEG-2 NBC/MPEG-4 Audio standard
ISO/IEC 13818-7, 14496-1,2 and 3. This software module
42 matches
Mail list logo
