Source: mediaconch
Version: 24.06-1 fail
Severity: important
Here are recent instances where the test
https://sources.debian.org/src/mediaconch/24.06-1/debian/tests/check-mediaconch-gui/#L28
has failed on armhf:
https://ci.debian.net/packages/m/mediaconch/testing/armel/50799168/
https://ci.debia
Can you please run the command "ldd /usr/bin/ffmpeg" and share the output
with us?
Also, are you sure you are executing /usr/bin/ffmpeg and not accidentally
/usr/local/bin/ffmpeg?
Thanks,
-rt
Hi Gregor,
I've applied your patch to our git branch, I think it looks good.
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 7:27 PM gregor herrmann wrote:
>
> The whole virtualcam support currently is a bit fragile (trying to
> load kernel modules, always using the first of potentially several
> /dev/video* devices
Control: reassign -1 libvdpau1
Control: severity normal
Hi,
I can't reproduce this on my intel-based laptop, running intel drivers in a
wayland session.
It seems like a nvidia (vdpau?) specific issue to me. Reassigning to libvdpau.
Best,
-rt
Do you have a compatible tv card and can test that it actually works?
Last time I looked at it is a decade ago. I think there are better
alternatives available. Maybe we should rather remove it from Debian?
Let me know what you think.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 20:03 Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
wrote:
9452979..23246df 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+libheif (1.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ * Team Upload
+
+ [ Dylan Aïssi ]
+ * Add patch to fix CVE-2019-11471, Closes: #928210
+
+ -- Reinhard Tartler Sat, 01 Jun 2019 17:56:05 -0400
+
libheif
g fix: "CVE-2019-11221: buffer-overflow issue in gf_import_message()
+in media_import.c", thanks to Salvatore Bonaccorso (Closes: #926963).
+
+ -- Reinhard Tartler Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:41:15 -0400
+
gpac (0.5.2-426-gc5ad4e4+dfsg5-4.1) unstable; urgency=medium
* CVE-2018-7752 (Closes: #8
[trimming receipients]
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:44 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
wrote:
> > Uploaded 0.7.1-2 to experimental, which is (again) in NEW. Thorsten,
> > let me know if there are any issues with that upload.
>
> 0.7.1-1 is still in NEW targetting unstable, so if -2 gets accepted, -1
> wi
On 4/4/19 3:38 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 10:40:44PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> Ah, that's great news. I didn't realize that Moritz backported the
>> security fixes to an earlier upstream version. I managed to locate the
>> git comm
On 4/2/19 3:08 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Thorsten Alteholz:
>> Hi Reinhard,
>>
>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>> Now about 6 weeks have passed since I've been uploading this package, and
>>> I do have a question: Is there anything wr
Dear ftp-master team,
On 2/15/19 7:20 AM, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> binary:libgpac7 is NEW.
> binary:libgpac7 is NEW.
>
> Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
> from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
> OpenPGP signature a
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:49 PM Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 08:25:55AM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >Depends: libavcodec58 (= 7:4.1.1-2),
> > libavdevice58 (= 7:4.1.1-2), libavfilter7 (= 7:4.1.1-2), libavformat58 (
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 9:36 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > What might work is disabling the avdevice outdev AND
> > moving 'ffplay' to its own binary package.
>
> Before suggesting this, I would prefer the OP to test. I
> still do not entirely believe that this fixes his issue.
>
>
There is a go
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 6:57 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2019-03-10 23:21 GMT+01:00, Reinhard Tartler :
> > On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 2:51 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos
> wrote:
> >
> >> Could you test the configure option "--disable-outdev=sdl2"?
> >> Your r
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 2:51 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Could you test the configure option "--disable-outdev=sdl2"?
> Your report indicates it should fix your issue, I am not convinced but
> if it fixes your issue, Debian should consider using it as the device
> is mostly a (cheap) debu
Control: tag -1 upstream
Hi Mathieu,
Sorry for the late reply.
This is an upstream issue and needs to be dealt as such. Can you please
visit https://github.com/gpac/gpac/issues/new and report back the issue
number you got? I'd be happy to add the necessary linking so that we are
notified when th
Control: tag -1 upstream
Hi Tiberio,
Sorry for the late reply.
This is an upstream issue and needs to be dealt as such. Can you please
visit https://github.com/gpac/gpac/issues/new and report back the issue
number you got? I'd be happy to add the necessary linking so that we are
notified when th
Control: tag -1 upstream
Hi Mathieu,
Sorry for the late reply.
This is an upstream issue and needs to be dealt as such. Can you please
visit https://github.com/gpac/gpac/issues/new and report back the issue
number you got? I'd be happy to add the necessary linking so that we are
notified when th
Control: tags -1 -d-i
Control: retitle -1 "Investigate the use of versioned provides in place of
the alternative dependencies in shlibdeps"
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Hi James,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:45 AM James Cowgill wrote:
> Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
>
> Hi,
>
> On 21/07/18 16:23,
Hi James, Hi Sebastian,
thank you, I clearly must have missed the transition bug.
Best,
Reinhard
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:18 PM James Cowgill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 26/06/18 20:09, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I notice that we have an FFmpeg 4
Hi everyone,
I notice that we have an FFmpeg 4.0 transition coming up:
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-ffmpeg.html
However, I fail to find the email to debian-release or bug report
coordinating the release. Maybe I missed it, or there was some talk about
this on IRC? In any event
Hi Mattia,
I am around, but am unsure what to do. Reading through the past mails on
this topic on the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list, I thought the
plan was to move all packages to use "debian-multimedia@lists.debian.org"
as maintainer, and we could safely let go of the alioth list. I may
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 8:53 AM James Cowgill wrote:
>
> > listmasters mentioned multiple times that they don't want something on
> > l.d.o to appear in the Maintainers field.
>
> I don't think they said that. They said that they don't want lots of
> mailing lists on lists.debian.org for purely fo
On Nov 23, 2014 6:14 AM, "Jonas Smedegaard" wrote:
>
> Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-11-23 02:57:33)
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-11-20 21:45:56)
> >>> On Nov 20, 2014 3:01 PM,
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.11.2014 10:11, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>>
>> I have two more ideas regarding this issue:
>>
>> 1) We have two library packages that conflict with each other. Why don't
>> we have two -dev packages that conflict with each oth
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> I have two more ideas regarding this issue:
>
> 1) We have two library packages that conflict with each other. Why don't
> we have two -dev packages that conflict with each other, then?
>
> I suggest to introduce a new libavcodec-extra-dev
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2014-11-20 21:45:56)
>> On Nov 20, 2014 3:01 PM, "Jonas Smedegaard" <[1]d...@jones.dk> wrote:
>>> Quoting Andreas Cadhalpun (2014-11-20 17:09:49)
>>
On Nov 20, 2014 3:01 PM, "Jonas Smedegaard" wrote:
>
> Quoting Andreas Cadhalpun (2014-11-20 17:09:49)
> > On 19.11.2014 13:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> >> Possibly we can simplify even further:
> >>
> >>* Have package libavcodec-extra-NN provide virtual libavcodec-extra
> >> (i.e. non-v
On Nov 19, 2014 8:24 AM, "Nicolas George" wrote:
>
> Le nonidi 29 brumaire, an CCXXIII, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> > Possibly we can simplify even further:
> >
> > * Have package libavcodec-extra-NN provide virtual libavcodec-extra
> > (i.e. non-versioned name of itself)
> > * Let GPLv2
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
>> What could be considered problematic is that users technically do a
>> license violation by installing libavcodec-extra-NN together with
>> GPLv2 only packages. On might construct a situation where some Debian
>> user creates an applian
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 13.11.2014 15:12, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>>
>> Right, I believe there are many libavcodec-using packages out there that
>> are licensed under GPLv3 or similar licenses, whereas we forcefully keep
>> the default library package
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 13.11.2014, 08:34 -0500 schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
>> >From vlc's debian/changelog:
>> [...]
>> However, this package is linked to LGPL v3 libraries. So while the source is
>> GPL
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 21.02.2014, 08:45 +0530 schrieb shirish शिरीष:
>> Can somebody state for the reasons of a split of libavcodec54 and
>> libavcodec-extra-54 ? The only diff. I could see between both of them
>> are/were the three decoders whi
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Aurélien Roux wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Been kind of mute this last days. I didn't give up about it, but I had to
> think about it, read some doc (a lot actually, in the bunch of links you all
> gave me!! thanks ;) ), and check things with some friends.
>
> So, to keep you
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:54 PM, rosea.grammostola wrote:
>
>> * The Debian Multimedia Team spoke about plans to have a backport repo in
>> the past. I'm sure they're willing to help you here.
>
> Do you mean something different to the Debian ba
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM, rosea.grammostola
wrote:
> But as said before I would focus on a Debian Blend approach with
> metapackages and a such as Reinhard suggests, plus some additional
> documentation and instructions probably.
Regarding documentation, a great first step could be for exa
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Herman Robak wrote:
> På Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:26:14 +0100, skrev Reinhard Tartler
> :
>
>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 09:30:20AM +0100, Aurélien Roux wrote:
&
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 09:30:20AM +0100, Aurélien Roux wrote:
>> >Just ensure that the blend metapackage(s) don't depend on it.
>>
>> Maybe it might even have a conflict with pulseaudio, no?
>
> We discussed the option of having conflicts i
FYI, maybe anyone has some time for testing the vlc backport? See the
mail to the debian-backports list below.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Reinhard Tartler
Date: Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: backport request: gimp 2.8, vlc 2.0
To: debian-backpo
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Chris S. wrote:
> As a new Debian user, I believe I read the following document about
> multimedia codes:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/MultimediaCodecs
>
> However, as noted on the following two pages, Debian does not appear to
> approve of www.debian-multimedia.org:
which did build on the very same buildd 'lebrun':
https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=mplayer2&arch=sparc
Could anyone please have a look and explain me what's going on? Is there
anything to fix in the package? (porters CC'ed with this mail).
Thanks,
Reinhard
--
G
I don't currently
> know if the version included in mplayer is used or some system lib. I
> assumed that the included code is used without even checking for a system
> wide replacement; I don't specify anything mp3 related when calling
> configure. But I don't know for sure and cannot check at the moment.
>
> Thanks,
> Erik
___
MPlayer-dev-eng mailing list
mplayer-dev-...@mplayerhq.hu
https://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-dev-eng--- End Message ---
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
---
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
se summarize the (expected) changes of 64studio compared to
a stock squeeze installation? I'm asking to learn what of your work can
be merged back into pkg-multimedia.
I guess the answer includes a RT-enabled kernel, but other than that,
what else?
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard T
ian.
What do you think?
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-multimedia-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/877hgjmygj@fa
t; upstream JACK release is 1.9.2, a pre-release for JACK 2.0) you get:
check the SONAMEs. I assume that libjack.so.0 is for jack1, and that
jack2 has some later soname.
besides, there is no /usr/lib32 in debian or ubuntu. this directory is
used on some other distributions like fedora and derivative
so (libc6) => /usr/lib32/libjack.so
this looks pretty wrong. you cannot mix 32bit and 64bit libraries.
to me this looks like a local system configuration error.
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-multimedia-requ...@lists.debian.org
wit
which in fact even predates debian-multimedia.
>
> Yeah, sad to have to say goodbye to Debian Multimedia (the Debian
> one), I feel that name was quite easy and catchy. Anyway the important
> thing to me is to get a well maintained package set.
Indeed.
merry christmas!
--
Gruesse/gre
These points should be seen as proposed clarification to
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/Merge
The selling argument was (I think) that debian-multimedia.org already
exists and is well known, but has no relationship to demudi, which in
fact even predates debian-multimedia.
--
Gruesse/greet
he beauty of git :)
I think we should avoid that, at least for now.
FWIW, I haven't found the "beauty" of git yet... :/
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
repository has gained a lot of publicity
and fame, and we cannot ignore that. For that reason I suggest that we
use a distinguishable name, even if "we" or "you" have used/invented
that name before Christian Marillat.
Ideally we can invite Christian to collaborate or even join
ould be public. Also, upstream doesn't need to care about this,
> since we would still be using quilt patches that can be mailed to them. Also,
> if upstream is tracking the debian branch, merge points are stored, so
> upstream knows precisely which point in time you snapshotted.
ups
gt;> unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, see the ffmpeg
>> example), indeed!
>
> Note that upstream releases need not be official. You can tag in your local
> copy some point in history as upstream/x.y.z+somedate, and use that as the
> upstream release.
Ugh. And wh
ian diff
> is not a diff against upstream's tip, but against these tags.
If we track "upstream releases" (which I think we should do by default
unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, see the ffmpeg
example), indeed!
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
refer the
lists.alioth.debian.org lists.
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gt; using any resources there.
I noticed you have already been added! welcome!
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ures, which I tend to think is useful to know
what's going on in the team)
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nternal communication to the PTS, so that contributors
that are only interested in ffmpeg receive only mails (discussion,
bugs and archive notifications) related to ffmpeg and avoid manual
filtering mails for other packages.
Loïc, Fabian, Comments?
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tart
ast workflow. TopGit seems to be able to generate a
> linear quilt patchset, which is nice for people wanting to review the
> source package.
Exactly. I think we don't do a mistake if we continue maintaining quilt
patches for now. I'd say let's see how this works out and reconsider
later.
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ined by xtophe, and previously by sam. Both are vlc
upstream developers. I think that indeed makes vlc special.
ffmpeg-debian is very special because of its, well interesting,
packaging. have a look at the latest commits :)
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ully the exact way
how to use to tool git.
> Administrative merging of the teams (ie, removing demudi or pkg-multimedia
> from alioth to use only one) should be done at least right after squeeze
> (since packages in lenny will point to both places).
Agreed.
As a side note, I think we
are still active AFAICS, it's just that the
> list itself isn't useful. I haven't seen much collaboration.
Well, this rather supports my suggestion to not use the mailing list in
the maintainer field, doesn't it?
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
r
focus on 'professional' audio and video editing tools rather than
'classic' multimedia packages like media players and multimedia
libraries.
If the debian-multimedia team is indeed dead, we should avoid setting it
in the maintainer field of any package. Nobody is served with
unreachable (or non-existant) maintainers.
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
63 matches
Mail list logo
