Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 10:01 -0700, Richard England wrote:
I don't believe there is any ROI in these discussions.
Risk Of Infection? I think there might be a danger of that...
:-) Return On Investment :-)
--
--
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 10:01 -0700, Richard England wrote:
> I don't believe there is any ROI in these discussions.
Risk Of Infection? I think there might be a danger of that...
--
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ig
> gil...@altern.org wrote:
>>
>> I know MPlayer somehow learned about this problem... only occurring at
>> radio-canada.ca, of course. One Quebecer must have written to them about
>> it while nobody wrote to Totem.
>>
>> Of course, mediaplayerconnectivity, which was used before MPlayer fixed
>> the
> gil...@altern.org wrote:
>>
>> I know MPlayer somehow learned about this problem... only occurring at
>> radio-canada.ca, of course. One Quebecer must have written to them about
>> it while nobody wrote to Totem.
>>
>> Of course, mediaplayerconnectivity, which was used before MPlayer fixed
>> the
gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
> I know MPlayer somehow learned about this problem... only occurring at
> radio-canada.ca, of course. One Quebecer must have written to them about
> it while nobody wrote to Totem.
>
> Of course, mediaplayerconnectivity, which was used before MPlayer fixed
> the proble
> On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 04:23 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> I would say much closer to 100. So Totem developers know about the
>> problem
>
> You *know* this do you? You know that the people working on it have
> tried to do what you've done (as opposed to lots of other things that
> they migh
Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 04:23 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
I would say much closer to 100. So Totem developers know about the
problem
You *know* this do you? You know that the people working on it have
tried to do what you've done (as opposed to lots of other things that
t
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 04:23 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> I would say much closer to 100. So Totem developers know about the
> problem
You *know* this do you? You know that the people working on it have
tried to do what you've done (as opposed to lots of other things that
they might have succ
> On 09/08/09 00:23, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> Frank Murphy wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/08/09 20:31, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>>
Let's hope Totem can fix this, 'cause I'm not very much into finding
>> URLs.
>>
>>> Then file a bugzilla, against totem (gstreamer?), giving the url that
>> cause the pro
> gil...@altern.org wrote:
> Have you considered actually complaining to the broadcaster who is not
> providing cross-platform compatible versions of their media?
I already said I did another thread. You didn't care to read it, I suppose
you don't want me to repeat.
>>Say there are 10 stations p
gil...@altern.org wrote:
>Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>> On 08/08/09 20:31, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
>>> Let's hope Totem can fix this, 'cause I'm not very much into finding
>URLs.
>
>> Then file a bugzilla, against totem (gstreamer?), giving the url that
>cause the problem, showing that you can play i
On 09/08/09 00:23, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>> On 08/08/09 20:31, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
>>> Let's hope Totem can fix this, 'cause I'm not very much into finding
> URLs.
>
>> Then file a bugzilla, against totem (gstreamer?), giving the url that
> cause the problem, sh
Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 08/08/09 20:31, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> Let's hope Totem can fix this, 'cause I'm not very much into finding
URLs.
> Then file a bugzilla, against totem (gstreamer?), giving the url that
cause the problem, showing that you can play it in mplayer
I use mplayer, why s
gil...@altern.org wrote:
>>>Sam wrote:
: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
>>>Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
>MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
>> Totem/GStreamer works for me thanks.
>
>With WMV, everywhere? Try it h
On 08/08/09 20:31, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> On 08/08/09 20:17, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> Sam wrote:
>>: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
> Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
>>> MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer wor
> On 08/08/09 20:17, gil...@altern.org wrote:
Sam wrote:
>: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
>> MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
>>> Totem/GStreamer works for me thanks.
>>
>
On 08/08/09 20:17, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>>> Sam wrote:
: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
>>> Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
> MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
>> Totem/GStreamer works for me thanks.
>
> With W
>>Sam wrote:
>>>: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
>>Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
> Totem/GStreamer works for me thanks.
With WMV, everywhere? Try it here:
radio-Canada.ca
It worked
>Sam wrote:
>
>>: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
>
>Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as
>MPlayer codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
Totem/GStreamer works for me thanks.
--
Sam
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
Sam wrote:
>: This package provides FFmpeg-based GStreamer plug-ins.
Maybe they are there, but they sure don't have the same effect as MPlayer
codecs and plug-ins: MPlayer works.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listin
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 22:21 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> It would just be nice if, instead of letting threads go on endlessly,
> it was clearly told that Totem is very unlikely -- despite
> Radio-Canada pretending so -- to play WMV unless you buy Fluendo and
> that MPlayer offers a free altern
>Antonio wrote:
>
>> Totem has come a long ways and you get it whether you like it or not
>because it meets Fedora's requirements + it does not have the ability
>to play proprietary file formats by default, one has to add them
>through other repositories like rpmfusion.
>
>To my surprise, it seems
> On 07/08/09 20:56, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> Antonio wrote:
>>
>>> Totem has come a long ways and you get it whether you like it or not
>> because it meets Fedora's requirements + it does not have the ability to
>> play proprietary file formats by default, one has to add them through
>> other r
On 07/08/09 20:56, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> Antonio wrote:
>
>> Totem has come a long ways and you get it whether you like it or not
> because it meets Fedora's requirements + it does not have the ability to
> play proprietary file formats by default, one has to add them through
> other reposito
Antonio wrote:
> Totem has come a long ways and you get it whether you like it or not
because it meets Fedora's requirements + it does not have the ability to
play proprietary file formats by default, one has to add them through
other repositories like rpmfusion.
To my surprise, it seems those co
Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 07/08/09 06:53, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>> (1) Many thanks to Frank Murphy for a few helpful lines on the matter.
>> This said, I hope we can go on with determining if windows media codecs
aren't, just as doc and xls formats, anything but a marketing scam.
> Windows me
--- On Thu, 8/6/09, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> From: gil...@altern.org
> Subject: Re: What are Microsoft codecs?
> To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora."
>
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 10:53 PM
> Antonio Olivares wrote:
&
On 07/08/09 06:53, gil...@altern.org wrote:
--snip--
>
>
> (1) Many thanks to Frank Murphy for a few helpful lines on the matter.
>
> This said, I hope we can go on with determining if windows media codecs
> aren't, just as doc and xls formats, anything but a marketing scam.
>
Windows media cod
On 07/08/09 01:38, Ed Greshko wrote:
--snip--
> Frankly,
Someone Call?
Well it's close enough :D
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
Please read
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
(specifically the part about repetitive posting)
Also, please keep questions on-topic. For your style of
comment/question it may make more sense to start a
Antonio Olivares wrote:
>> Fedora policy is like GAYS IN THE
> MILITARY ===> DONT ASK DON'T TELL and DON'T BOTHER :)
Red Hat, for better or for worst (see my thread on Shuttleworth and
Debian), is a publicly traded company. If you're a stock holder, you
/might/ have something to say in the way it
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:38 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Just rememberthe only opinions that matter are his.
I've worked with people like that, in the past. I avoid it as much as
possible, now. I get really annoyed with people who ask questions
(advice, opinions, etc.) when they don't actu
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 06:51 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> As I already said
> elsewhere, since this the most general Fedora forum and there is none
> peculiar to that matter, this is where it should be discussed.
you are becoming a broken record...
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidden
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:38 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> >
> >> What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more than an encapulation of MP4? What's
> >> the legal status of MP4? Once
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:38 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> >
> >> What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more than an encapulation of MP4? What's
> >> the legal status of MP4? Once
--- On Thu, 8/6/09, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> From: gil...@altern.org
> Subject: What are Microsoft codecs?
> To: fedora-list@redhat.com
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 5:50 PM
> What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more
> than an encapulation of MP4? What's
&g
Ed Greshko wrote:
> Craig, Craig, Craigyou fail to understand. He wants you to find the
> info for him so that he can disagree with you and then reopen his
> "discussion" about "market share".
>
> As evidenced by his most recent post...he also wants people that
> disagree with him, and who ca
gil...@altern.org wrote
>> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
>> The Internet has a vast amount of information and if you want more
>> targeted information, try wikipedia.org...they will have the answers to
>> each of the things you are wondering about above, including w
Craig White wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
>
>> What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more than an encapulation of MP4? What's
>> the legal status of MP4? Once you have at hand the
>> compression/decompression algorithms -- whic
> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> The Internet has a vast amount of information and if you want more
> targeted information, try wikipedia.org...they will have the answers to
> each of the things you are wondering about above, including what makes
> ODF files smaller.
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 05:50 +0500, gil...@altern.org wrote:
> What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more than an encapulation of MP4? What's
> the legal status of MP4? Once you have at hand the
> compression/decompression algorithms -- which must have been developed by
> mathemati
What are Microsoft codecs? Is it more than an encapulation of MP4? What's
the legal status of MP4? Once you have at hand the
compression/decompression algorithms -- which must have been developed by
mathematicians decades ago -- is there so much work involved in writing
codecs? Has the reason
42 matches
Mail list logo
