Re: mplayer vs. xine
Hmm, I didn't catch that notice. Glad to see the DivX code was rewritten. I wonder if Marillat will want to officially package it? On July 17, 2003 02:05 am, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:37:26PM -0500, Antiphon wrote: > > Actually, not all of MPlayer is GPL. While the main routines have been > > relicensed under it, there are still portions of it that are non-free. > > > > MPlayer devs have been working on removing non-free portions but the DivX > > code in it is still non-free. Until this code gets replaced, don't expect > > it in official Debian or in KDE. > > It's already coped with, according to: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200307/msg00942.html > > What remains is that we still need a brave soul to package this > monster of a package. > > -- > Riku Voipio |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | > kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974 --+-- > 02140 Espoo| | > Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. |
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Thursday 17 July 2003 05:37, Antiphon wrote: > Actually, not all of MPlayer is GPL. While the main routines have been > relicensed under it, there are still portions of it that are non-free. > > MPlayer devs have been working on removing non-free portions but the DivX > code in it is still non-free. Until this code gets replaced, don't expect > it in official Debian or in KDE. Could you please show me any code in the MPlayer project that is not under GPL licence. The code from the OpenDivX project is not used anymore. All DivX encoding/decoding is handled by libavcodec from the ffmpeg project. Which xine also uses btw.. Anders -- This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1.2 on Debian GNU/Linux
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:37:26PM -0500, Antiphon wrote: > Actually, not all of MPlayer is GPL. While the main routines have been > relicensed under it, there are still portions of it that are non-free. > > MPlayer devs have been working on removing non-free portions but the DivX > code > in it is still non-free. Until this code gets replaced, don't expect it in > official Debian or in KDE. It's already coped with, according to: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200307/msg00942.html What remains is that we still need a brave soul to package this monster of a package. -- Riku Voipio|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974 --+-- 02140 Espoo| | Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. |
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Jeudi, 17 Juillet 2003 01.26, David Bishop wrote: > If the buld dies complaining about missing packages, just copy and paste > the package names into an apt-get install line. apt-get build-dep mplayer should do the trick, too... Ineiti -- -- Linus Gasser Chemin des Cèdres 1 1004 Lausanne 021 647 53 05 http://www.linusetviviane.ch --
Re: mplayer vs. xine
Actually, not all of MPlayer is GPL. While the main routines have been relicensed under it, there are still portions of it that are non-free. MPlayer devs have been working on removing non-free portions but the DivX code in it is still non-free. Until this code gets replaced, don't expect it in official Debian or in KDE. On July 16, 2003 10:21 pm, Cameron Patrick wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:08:27PM -0500, Antiphon wrote: > | Licensing. Mplayer is not released under a license compatible with the > | Debian Free Software Guidelines. > > Like the GPL, you mean? > > $ cat /usr/share/doc/mplayer-686/copyright > This package was debianized by Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on > Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:24:04 +0100. > > It was downloaded from http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/ > > Copyright: GPL > > You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License with > the Debian GNU/Linux distribution in file /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL; > if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite > 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA > > CP.
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:08:27PM -0500, Antiphon wrote: | Licensing. Mplayer is not released under a license compatible with the Debian | Free Software Guidelines. Like the GPL, you mean? $ cat /usr/share/doc/mplayer-686/copyright This package was debianized by Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:24:04 +0100. It was downloaded from http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/ Copyright: GPL You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License with the Debian GNU/Linux distribution in file /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA CP.
Re: mplayer vs. xine
Licensing. Mplayer is not released under a license compatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. On July 16, 2003 05:24 pm, Wolfgang Mader wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > hello, > > noatun uses the xine lib by plugins to play most of the videoformats > (nothing new to you i think :-)) > on my system mplayer i much faster than xine. is there a reason and if so > why is noatun not using mplayer. > cheers wolfgang
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 05:15 pm, Daniel Andor wrote: > On Thursday 17 July 2003 12:06 am, David Bishop wrote: > I was blindly under the assumption that one would be using mplayer debs > from Marillat, which do not have arts support compiled in. (He has a note > (as of 04/04/2003) about it on his webpage http://marillat.free.fr ) Yes, I saw some noise about how that is only because he's the Gnome maintainer, and hates KDE. But now I'm passing on gossip... > So if you compile mplayer yourself, or use another deb repository, then you > can be good with arts. I use his repository, but build from source. Only takes a few minutes, and makes it nice to use in Konqueror (don't have to stop noatun and wait for arts to timeout before viewing a webpage with video). For those of you who are scared to build from source, do this: add 'deb-src http://perso.wanadoo.fr/debian/ unstable main' to your /etc/apt/sources.list run apt-get source mplayer while in some temp directory go into the newly created subdir then the debian subdir. edit the 'rules' file, look for an mplayer-custom rule, and change the configure to match what you want (add --with-arts, or whatever it is) go back to the main directory and run 'sudo debuild' when it's done crunching, go up one directory and use 'dpkg -i mplayer-custom-blah.deb' to install your shiny new package. If the buld dies complaining about missing packages, just copy and paste the package names into an apt-get install line. If you run into trouble, ask me. Nicely would be preferred, but not required. -- "Sorry about the whole 'bomb' thing" - Bruce Rollins D.A.Bishop pgpsXSxybfxcY.pgp Description: signature
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Thursday 17 July 2003 12:06 am, David Bishop wrote: > > I say _thin_ wrapper, since neither use arts. For that, you need to wrap > > mplayer with artsdsp, and take care of latency manually. > > Not quite true. Mplayer can use arts 'natively', and KMplayer,at least, > has a gui option to turn that option on. Alternatively, you can change > your mplayer config file, and it will work no matter what front-end you > use. Yes, sorry, that's correct. > This all assumes that you are using an mplayer with arts support built-in. I was blindly under the assumption that one would be using mplayer debs from Marillat, which do not have arts support compiled in. (He has a note (as of 04/04/2003) about it on his webpage http://marillat.free.fr ) So if you compile mplayer yourself, or use another deb repository, then you can be good with arts. D
PS (Re: mplayer vs. xine)
On Thursday 17 July 2003 12:02 am, Daniel Andor wrote: > KMplayer http://www.xs4all.nl/~jjvrieze/kmplayer.html > OR > KPlayer http://kplayer.sourceforge.net/ As a footnote: I marginally prefer KMplayer over KPlayer, since KMplayer works nicely for webpages with embedded video (e.g. trailers).
Re: mplayer vs. xine
> I say _thin_ wrapper, since neither use arts. For that, you need to wrap > mplayer with artsdsp, and take care of latency manually. Not quite true. Mplayer can use arts 'natively', and KMplayer,at least, has a gui option to turn that option on. Alternatively, you can change your mplayer config file, and it will work no matter what front-end you use. This all assumes that you are using an mplayer with arts support built-in. -- "Sorry about the whole 'bomb' thing" - Bruce Rollins D.A.Bishop pgp8yqrnqhdB3.pgp Description: signature
Re: mplayer vs. xine
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 11:24 pm, Wolfgang Mader wrote: > noatun uses the xine lib by plugins to play most of the videoformats > (nothing new to you i think :-)) > on my system mplayer i much faster than xine. is there a reason and if so > why is noatun not using mplayer. For a thin wrapper around mplayer, try either KMplayer http://www.xs4all.nl/~jjvrieze/kmplayer.html (also available directly from James Greenhalgh's CVS deb packages) OR KPlayer http://kplayer.sourceforge.net/ (also available from Marillat's multimedia deb repository, along with mplayer debs) I say _thin_ wrapper, since neither use arts. For that, you need to wrap mplayer with artsdsp, and take care of latency manually. HTH, D
