[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Problems affecting the "ffmpeg2" package
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 03:52:24AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> > Is there any reason that we still need the "ffmpeg" package? I would
> > like to simply update it to the same versiom as the "ffmpeg2" package.
> There are 31 packages using it (vs. 6 using ffmpeg2) (and 11 using
> ffmpeg010). I have no idea how many of those will work with it; given
> the history of ffmpeg it might be a good idea to come up with a
> migration scheme.
Okay. I'll leave the "ffmpeg" package as it is for now.
> > Alternative I would like to change the "ffmpeg2" package to conflict
> > with the "ffmpeg" package and install binary and libraries in the
> > normal place.
> That sounds necessary independent of what scheme we come up with for
> moving forward.
I don't think so. It seems that the existing practice is to allow
co-existance. That's a least what the "ffmpeg010" package does.
Matthias Scheler http://zhadum.org.uk/
Main Index |
Thread Index |