Re: Problems affecting the "ffmpeg2" package

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

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.

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/