[ATrpms-users] x264 incompatible with gstreamer-plugins-bad from Freshrpms

[Paulo Cavalcanti]

On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 8:12 PM, Andre Costa <blueser at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Axel, thks for the quick reply =)
>
> On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 18:21, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at atrpms.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 04:10:34PM -0300, Andre Costa wrote:
>> > I've been using Freshrpms for quite some time already and recently
>> enabled
>> > ATrpms in order to grab a newer version for mplayerplug-in[*], but now I
>> > have this conflict. "smart upgrade" yields this:
>> >
>> > Upgrading packages (1):
>> >   x264-0.60-6_20080626.2245.fc9 at x86_64
>> >
>> > Installing packages (1):
>> >   libx264gtk60-0.60-6_20080626.2245.fc9 at x86_64
>> >
>> >
>> > Removing packages (1):
>> >   gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.7-2.fc9 at x86_64
>> >
>> >
>> > Installed x264 is
>> >
>> > x264-0.0.0-0.6.20080510.fc9.x86_64
>> >
>> > from Freshrpms.
>> >
>> > Any chance ATrpms and Freshrpms could work together to fix this?
>>
>> Certainly. ATrpms is already splitting the package up in a base part
>> and a pure runtime part, that can coexist with others. I.e. you can
>> have libx264.so.{54,58,60} installed in parallel if different
>> applications have been built against different versions of x264.
>>
>> So actually gstreamer-plugins-bad should not explicitly depend on the
>> package "x264", but allow rpm to figure out the dependencies
>> itself. I'm guessing here at what the problem may be, so perhaps the
>> suggestions makes no sense, but it's quite likely.
>
>
> Mmmh... you got me there, don't know that much about RPMs to help you =(
> Anyway, I know you and Matthias will figure it out ;-) Let me know if you
> need any help with tests.
>

He is trying to say that it is possible to have more that one shared library
version
for x264 on your system. Freshrpms is using an older version of x264 ...

In fact, the whole gstreamer suite is always behind in Fedora.
These are the latest versions I am current using. Note that
gstreamer-plugin-good 0.10.9 is supplying the pulse plugin,
and Fedora's gstreamer pulse plugin is no longer necessary.
I compile these rpms myself to guarantee they are linked
with the libraries from ATrpms, which is my main repo.

gstreamer-0.10.20-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-devel-0.10.20-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-ffmpeg-0.10.4-1.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-bad-0.10.8-3.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-bad-devel-0.10.8-3.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-base-0.10.20-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-base-devel-0.10.20-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-good-0.10.9-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-good-devel-0.10.9-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-plugins-ugly-0.10.8-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-python-0.10.12-2.fc8.x86_64
gstreamer-tools-0.10.20-2.fc8.x86_64


-- 
Paulo Roma Cavalcanti
LCG - UFRJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20080809/4fa5ef0f/attachment.html