[arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
---enable-libfaac \
---enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
--
() against html e-mail | usenet email communication netiquette
/\ www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264' 'libtheora'
'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger' 'libvpx'
'libva' 'openjpeg')
---enable-libfaac \
---enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
--
Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
---enable-libfaac \
---enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying.
Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something?
What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents?
It could have some widespread implications for the distro.
Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed
patents... ha... ha...
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 07-05-2011 17:05, Loui Chang wrote: Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... ... and then you fall out of bed and wake up. Either that or someone with very very very deep pockets needs to finance that. I agree that all this software patent stuff is getting ridiculous but it's what we have now. As far as I know most if not all distros (and upstream) are leaving the choice of using patented stuff up to the end user. -- Mauro Santos
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat, 7 May 2011 12:05:21 -0400, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
---enable-libfaac \
---enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying.
Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something?
What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents?
It could have some widespread implications for the distro.
Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed
patents... ha... ha...
Licenses and patents are different things. Some stuff cannot legally
distributed and we respect that. This is usually proprietary/non-free
software or packages like the Microsoft fonts. (Wasn't there also some
mplayer codec pack that included some Windows dlls?)
On the other hand there are software patents valid in some countries
which apply also to a completely free implementation. This means there
are a bunch of packages which you are not allowed to use in the US for
example even though they are licensed under e.g. the GPL.
Greetings,
Pierre
--
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: On Sat, 7 May 2011 12:05:21 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was changed for licensing reasons? licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying. Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something? What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents? It could have some widespread implications for the distro. Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... Licenses and patents are different things. Some stuff cannot legally distributed and we respect that. This is usually proprietary/non-free software or packages like the Microsoft fonts. (Wasn't there also some mplayer codec pack that included some Windows dlls?) On the other hand there are software patents valid in some countries which apply also to a completely free implementation. This means there are a bunch of packages which you are not allowed to use in the US for example even though they are licensed under e.g. the GPL. a bit of a divergence ... but as i think about next-gen packaging quite a bit i've often considered if a most advanced distribution system would negate issues like this ... for example, what if a nonfree package _knew_ it was nonfree, and therefore would only be distributed from servers in countries that do not deem it an issue? when user went to to sync it, their IP would be geolocated (or just a setting, eg. RESIDENT) and if need be the user would be warned that the package they are synced may have unknown legal implications. would something like that work? C Anthony
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat 07 May 2011 18:18 +0200, Pierre Schmitz wrote: On Sat, 7 May 2011 12:05:21 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was changed for licensing reasons? licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying. Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something? What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents? It could have some widespread implications for the distro. Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... Licenses and patents are different things. Some stuff cannot legally distributed and we respect that. This is usually proprietary/non-free software or packages like the Microsoft fonts. (Wasn't there also some mplayer codec pack that included some Windows dlls?) On the other hand there are software patents valid in some countries which apply also to a completely free implementation. This means there are a bunch of packages which you are not allowed to use in the US for example even though they are licensed under e.g. the GPL. Ah yeah I'm making some assumptions. It would be nice to understand the exact reasons that the support was removed. I'm assuming that faac support was removed because of patent issues, and that ffmpeg does conform to the MPEG-2 NBC/MPEG-4 Audio standards. The license of the code itself [1] would not seem to necessarily forbid binary distribution. The reason that it is incompatible with LGPL is because the original license allows free license only to products which conform to the MPEG-2 NBC/MPEG-4 Audio standards. Relicensing all of the code as LGPL would nullify that requirement which is not allowed. [1] http://faac.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/faac/faac/README?revision=1.7
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat 07 May 2011 11:24 -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote: a bit of a divergence ... but as i think about next-gen packaging quite a bit i've often considered if a most advanced distribution system would negate issues like this ... for example, what if a nonfree package _knew_ it was nonfree, and therefore would only be distributed from servers in countries that do not deem it an issue? when user went to to sync it, their IP would be geolocated (or just a setting, eg. RESIDENT) and if need be the user would be warned that the package they are synced may have unknown legal implications. would something like that work? Maybe not completely. At least it would relieve mirrors of possible infringement which is good for them. Arch might still be found guilty though.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
Excerpts from C Anthony Risinger's message of 2011-05-07 18:24:38 +0200: On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: On Sat, 7 May 2011 12:05:21 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was changed for licensing reasons? licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying. Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something? What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents? It could have some widespread implications for the distro. Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... Licenses and patents are different things. Some stuff cannot legally distributed and we respect that. This is usually proprietary/non-free software or packages like the Microsoft fonts. (Wasn't there also some mplayer codec pack that included some Windows dlls?) On the other hand there are software patents valid in some countries which apply also to a completely free implementation. This means there are a bunch of packages which you are not allowed to use in the US for example even though they are licensed under e.g. the GPL. a bit of a divergence ... but as i think about next-gen packaging quite a bit i've often considered if a most advanced distribution system would negate issues like this ... for example, what if a nonfree package _knew_ it was nonfree, and therefore would only be distributed from servers in countries that do not deem it an issue? when user went to to sync it, their IP would be geolocated (or just a setting, eg. RESIDENT) and if need be the user would be warned that the package they are synced may have unknown legal implications. would something like that work? C Anthony Too complicated, error prone and not really adding anything.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Saturday, May 07, 2011 12:26:54 Philipp Überbacher wrote: Excerpts from C Anthony Risinger's message of 2011-05-07 18:24:38 +0200: On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: On Sat, 7 May 2011 12:05:21 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was changed for licensing reasons? licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it Gah. All this licensing stuff is starting to get really annoying. Did Arch receive a patent license violation notice or something? What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents? It could have some widespread implications for the distro. Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... Licenses and patents are different things. Some stuff cannot legally distributed and we respect that. This is usually proprietary/non-free software or packages like the Microsoft fonts. (Wasn't there also some mplayer codec pack that included some Windows dlls?) On the other hand there are software patents valid in some countries which apply also to a completely free implementation. This means there are a bunch of packages which you are not allowed to use in the US for example even though they are licensed under e.g. the GPL. a bit of a divergence ... but as i think about next-gen packaging quite a bit i've often considered if a most advanced distribution system would negate issues like this ... for example, what if a nonfree package _knew_ it was nonfree, and therefore would only be distributed from servers in countries that do not deem it an issue? when user went to to sync it, their IP would be geolocated (or just a setting, eg. RESIDENT) and if need be the user would be warned that the package they are synced may have unknown legal implications. would something like that work? C Anthony Too complicated, error prone and not really adding anything. In my not so humble opinion, I don't think we should waste time kowtowing to the annoying politics of what's free or not when it comes to actual implementation of something. Keep the nonfree stuff there. No one is forcing users to have them, and most Linux users don't give a damn if something is nonfree.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 12:32 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib'
'x264' 'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
---enable-libfaac \
---enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Will be also unlinked from mplayer?
--
Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
\cos^2\alpha + \sin^2\alpha = 1
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 08:41 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote:
On 05/07/2011 12:32 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib'
'x264' 'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
- --enable-libfaac \
- --enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Will be also unlinked from mplayer?
mplayer doesn't use system ffmpg
--
Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 8 May 2011 02:07, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 05/07/2011 08:41 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote:
On 05/07/2011 12:32 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib'
'x264' 'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
- --enable-libfaac \
- --enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Will be also unlinked from mplayer?
mplayer doesn't use system ffmpg
The question was aimed at the fact thatt mplayer too has faac as depends...
As an opinion: I'd rather not want to recompile mplayer every time
there's an update, been there before because of other reason, it's not
much fun. Using mencoder to convert avis to mp4 to use on Android:
those _do_ require faac, as much as I can tell
Greg
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 09:21 PM, Gergely Imreh wrote: Will be also unlinked from mplayer? mplayer doesn't use system ffmpg The question was aimed at the fact thatt mplayer too has faac as depends... As an opinion: I'd rather not want to recompile mplayer every time there's an update, been there before because of other reason, it's not much fun. Using mencoder to convert avis to mp4 to use on Android: those _do_ require faac, as much as I can tell Greg now i understand the question. It won't be removed. I did it for ffmpeg because it has a big warning after ./configure License: nonfree and unredistributable maybe mplayer does it right and doesn't link to incompatible licence -- Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 09:21 PM, Gergely Imreh wrote:
On 8 May 2011 02:07, Ionut Biruib...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 05/07/2011 08:41 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote:
On 05/07/2011 12:32 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib'
'x264' 'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
- --enable-libfaac \
- --enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Will be also unlinked from mplayer?
mplayer doesn't use system ffmpg
The question was aimed at the fact thatt mplayer too has faac as depends...
As an opinion: I'd rather not want to recompile mplayer every time
there's an update, been there before because of other reason, it's not
much fun. Using mencoder to convert avis to mp4 to use on Android:
those _do_ require faac, as much as I can tell
Greg
You don't _have_ to use faac. You can process the audio separately with
nero's aac encoder[1].
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15897
--
cantabile
Jayne is a girl's name. -- River
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 03:43 PM, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 09:21 PM, Gergely Imreh wrote: Will be also unlinked from mplayer? mplayer doesn't use system ffmpg The question was aimed at the fact thatt mplayer too has faac as depends... As an opinion: I'd rather not want to recompile mplayer every time there's an update, been there before because of other reason, it's not much fun. Using mencoder to convert avis to mp4 to use on Android: those _do_ require faac, as much as I can tell Greg now i understand the question. It won't be removed. I did it for ffmpeg because it has a big warning after ./configure License: nonfree and unredistributable maybe mplayer does it right and doesn't link to incompatible licence Many packages in Arch Linux are considered non-free in other distros this is what I much like about Arch Linux :) -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi \cos^2\alpha + \sin^2\alpha = 1
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] krb5
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Stéphane Gaudreault steph...@archlinux.org wrote: * Replace heimdal by the MIT Kerberos implementation, krb5 * Rebuilded [core] packages : - librpcsecgss - libtirpc - nfs-utils - openssh Please signoff both. Thanks Stéphane I see a regression versus heimdal here. Do this: 1. Set up krb5.conf to enable proxiable and forwardable tickets 2. Set up ~/.ssh/config to enable GSSAPIAuthentication and GSSAPIDelegateCredentials 3. Use kinit from this krb5 package to get a new TGT 4. Use the ssh client from this openssh rebuild to connect to a server that support GSSAPI auth On some, but not all, ssh server implementations, GSSAPI auth will fail, and it will fall back to password auth. The server will log this: sshd[3822]: Forcing password authentication because no credentials delegated When using the heimdal-based builds, GSSAPI auth would work in all cases. It's entirely likely that only very old ssh servers show this problem, as that's what I'm seeing so far. Possibly there is some confusion with the new Okay as delegate ticket flag, which heimdal didn't support at all, and MIT krb5 only supports enough to parse and report, but has no support for setting. I don't consider this important enough to block the release of these packages, but I wanted to mention it in case someone else cares more than me.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 11:17 AM, Mauro Santos wrote: On 07-05-2011 17:05, Loui Chang wrote: Or the distro could purchase or otherwise aquire licenses to all claimed patents... ha... ha... ... and then you fall out of bed and wake up. Either that or someone with very very very deep pockets needs to finance that. I agree that all this software patent stuff is getting ridiculous but it's what we have now. As far as I know most if not all distros (and upstream) are leaving the choice of using patented stuff up to the end user. Before we run around thinking that the sky is falling, we must first answer the question is the patent we are concerned with VALID?, Who owns it?, and Who has the right to complain about its use? If someone isn't checking before disabling useful components of packages, then that is something we should think about doing. The UPSTO has on-line access to lookup and verify. It will list the owner, etc.. Intentionally crippling software base upon questionable patents is nuts. As I've mentioned before, the damages available for infringement are profits received from the use of IP Why OS distros with roughly $0 profits (total) are so paranoid about possible violation from a compiled in library that represents 1/100,000 of the distros' offering is a bit bewildering. Over the next few weeks, I'll take a look at the latest CLE papers I have on the topic and see if I can put together a little checklist that can help make sure we are only crippling the software legally that necessary. As for faad2/faac - ffmpeg doesn't have a clue if patents are involved: http://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html quote ...Also we have never read patents to implement any part of FFmpeg. ... What we do know is that various standards FFmpeg supports contain vague hints that any conforming implementation might be subject to some patent rights in some jurisdictions... /quote What information or supporting docs are we relying on in removing faac --non-free? Just curious really from a legal standpoint. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
drop nonfree stuff, fix headers
Modified: PKGBUILD
===
--- PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:29:11 UTC (rev 122937)
+++ PKGBUILD 2011-05-07 11:51:04 UTC (rev 122938)
@@ -5,26 +5,28 @@
-depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'faac' 'xvidcore' 'zlib'
'x264' 'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes'
'schroedinger' 'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
+depends=('bzip2' 'lame' 'sdl' 'libvorbis' 'xvidcore' 'zlib' 'x264'
'libtheora' 'opencore-amr' 'alsa-lib' 'libvdpau' 'libxfixes' 'schroedinger'
'libvpx' 'libva' 'openjpeg')
- --enable-libfaac \
- --enable-nonfree \
Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was
changed for licensing reasons?
Greg
licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it
Before we get too far down the licensing / patents / legality / etc
discussion, it's worth noting that faac is basically redundant in
ffmpeg these days anyway, as libavcodec contains ffmpeg's own
reimplementation of both an encoder and a decoder of AAC, just called
aac in the output of ffmpeg -codecs.
Re: [arch-general] [pacman-dev] pyqt packages confusion
On Saturday 07 May 2011 15:35:24 kachelaqa wrote: firstly: why does python2-pyqt now depend on pyqt (for python3)? why should it be necessary to drag in python3 and pyqt(3) for a python2 package? In the previous packages the python3 version had the python2 version as its dependence; I changed this because we are going to remove python2 a day. secondly: looking at the file lists, it appears that several critical files are now missing from python2-pyqt, namely: /usr/bin/pyuic4 /usr/bin/pylupdate4 /usr/bin/pyrcc4 /usr/lib/qt/plugins/designer/libpythonplugin.so (and possibly a few others) presumably, the intention is that those files will be provided by the pyqt(3) package instead. which makes no sense to me, because they are not guaranteed to be compatible. IMHO these two packages *must* be kept separate - it should be possible to install each package completely independently, without any danger of either one clobbering the files of the other. I, with the help of an user from the community, did a search and asked PyQt developers about this, and they say we can use those files for both versions of PyQt built with different python version. (nb: it might also be worth noting here that the new python2-pyqt package also breaks the python2-qscintilla package. bug report: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/24144) Fixed. Thanks. -- Andrea
Re: [arch-general] nautilus 3 update - pacman error
On 05/05/2011 01:42 PM, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/05/2011 09:38 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: guys, I think the nautilus INSTALL file has a problem. The latest update resulted in: (3/3) upgrading nautilus [###] 100% /tmp/alpm_1J0ybD/.INSTALL: line 4: gtk-update-icon-cache: command not found can you stop sending useless emails on this mailing list? gtk3-gtk-update-icon-cache i have a feeling that you forced a downgrade once when it was in testing using -f and now you have problems because of that pacman -S gtk-update-icon-cache What is this mailing list for? If the answer isn't on a wiki page and I'm getting errors from pacman -- what is the harm in asking a question on the list? I thank you for your answer -- it helped, but I can do without the snide comments. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
On 05/07/2011 12:33 PM, Yaro Kasear wrote: and most Linux users don't give a damn if something is nonfree. That's precisely part of the problem. You are walking blindly into patent traps and the destruction of a mutually beneficial community just for the sake of convenience. Have fun with that. Jonathan
Re: [arch-general] Drop non-free ?! (Was: Commit in ffmpeg/trunk)
Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 07 May 2011 18:32 +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/07/2011 06:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: Ionut Biru wrote: Is faac support in ffmpeg causing trouble to other applications or was changed for licensing reasons? licensing. if you need faac you should use abs to recompile it ... What is Arch's official policies when it comes to patents? It could have some widespread implications for the distro. Seems theres a heated topic on the forum about this [0]. I hadn't noticed it before, i had seen [1] though. Oh well, the forum isn't the suitable place for heated discussions anyway :) [0]: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=117855 [1]: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=116994 -- () against html e-mail | usenet email communication netiquette /\ www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
