Am Dienstag, den 19.08.2014, 02:13 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
> (Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.)
>
> On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> > > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> > > > I
On 2014-08-19 07:46:02, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Ramacher
> wrote:
> > (Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.)
> >
> > On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> >> On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Ramacher
wrote:
> (Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.)
>
> On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
>> On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
>> > > I believe that
On 2014-08-19 09:05:52, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 19.08.2014, 02:13 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
> > Let me know what you think.
>
> Looks reasonable!
>
> I have one suggestion: Couldn't we dynamically populate the
> debian/vlc{,-nox}.install files with the plugins, based o
On 2014-08-19 00:29:43, Edward Wang wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 02:13:16 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher
> wrote:
> >I've pushed a work-in-progress feature/vlc-plugins branch [1]. vlc-nox
> >has been left alive. Looking at the popcon data there seems to be
> >interest in the package (vlc: 51349 install
Am Dienstag, den 19.08.2014, 02:13 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
> Let me know what you think.
Looks reasonable!
I have one suggestion: Couldn't we dynamically populate the
debian/vlc{,-nox}.install files with the plugins, based on the decision
if their dependency check against lib{x11,xcb}
On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 02:13:16 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher
wrote:
I've pushed a work-in-progress feature/vlc-plugins branch [1]. vlc-nox
has been left alive. Looking at the popcon data there seems to be
interest in the package (vlc: 51349 installs vs. vlc-nox: 53687
installs). I've done the followin
(Dropping J-B from CC. I think this is purely Debian related now.)
On 2014-08-18 22:37:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> > On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> > > I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because
> >
> > I reme
On 18 Aug, Sebastian Ramacher wrote :
> On 2014-08-18 14:33:21, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> > Le 18/08/2014 13:37, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
> > >On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> > >>On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> > >>>I believe that upstream doesn't care that much ab
On 2014-08-18 14:33:21, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> Le 18/08/2014 13:37, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
> >On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> >>On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> >>>I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because
> >>
> >>I remember the idea.
Le 18/08/2014 13:37, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because
I remember the idea.
Basically, the idea was to split so that servers using VLC to do
st
On 2014-08-17 23:22:02, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> > I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because
>
> I remember the idea.
>
> Basically, the idea was to split so that servers using VLC to do
> streaming wouldn't need libX11 and all th
On 17 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> However, it turns out that libvlccore dropped some symbols and needs a
> SONAME bump:
> https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2014-August/099358.html.
Thanks a lot for noticing. That's why -preX are useful :)
> Once we have a -pre2, we can proceed
On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> I believe that upstream doesn't care that much about this, because
I remember the idea.
Basically, the idea was to split so that servers using VLC to do
streaming wouldn't need libX11 and all the rest.
> otherwise I'd expect the Makefiles to be a bit more he
On 17 Aug, Sebastian Ramacher wrote :
> we are currently discussing the removal of vlc-nox. Unfortunatly,
phonon4 on GNU/Linux will depend on libpulse, which will depend on libX11.
phonon5 may change this, but I have not seen anything about that yet.
I know not much about cytadela, but it seems t
On 17.08.2014 at 03:28 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a
lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way
to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and what plugin
should go to vlc-nox. I wonde
On 2014-08-17 12:32:55, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Mateusz Łukasik wrote:
> > +1 to drop vlc-nox, albo I think we should making samba plugin as a separate
> > package (#729238) it is pretty unnecessary plugin installation on embedded
> > systems.
>
> We need to go
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Mateusz Łukasik wrote:
> +1 to drop vlc-nox, albo I think we should making samba plugin as a separate
> package (#729238) it is pretty unnecessary plugin installation on embedded
> systems.
We need to go through NEW anyway, so now would be a great time for
that.
On 17 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> However, it turns out that libvlccore dropped some symbols and needs a
> SONAME bump:
> https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2014-August/099358.html.
>
> Once we have a -pre2, we can proceed with uploading to unstable, I guess.
The SONAME bump is
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
>> I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a
>> lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way
>> to much time figuring out what plugin sho
Hello,
On 16 Aug, Reinhard Tartler wrote :
> I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a
> lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way
> to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and what plugin
> should go to vlc-nox. I wonder if havi
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a
> lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way
> to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and what plugin
> should go to vlc
Hi,
I'm currently fighting with upgrading to VLC 2.2, and noticed that a
lot of plugins were shuffled around. I noticed that I'm spending way
to much time figuring out what plugin should go to vlc and what plugin
should go to vlc-nox. I wonder if having this split is really worth
the effort. How w
23 matches
Mail list logo
