Thanks on that James I don't intend to get into toxic areas, or complaining about it. I will just use the sources from upstream then. Will have a look at the archives re that, too, thanks On 04/12/2021 11:44, James Crake-Merani via arch-general wrote:

On 21/12/04 10:17am, TG Servers via arch-general wrote:

...

Hello,

is there any particular reason why these 2 packages are outdated since several months, or were they just not maintained? I am asking because I would need some of the newer functionality and would compile them from source otherwise. But only if there are no known problems with them. The compiles from upstream 21.09 work without any issues and I can't see of any problems, but always better to just confirm

Thanks Hi,

I recall a long discussion on this mailing list about outdated packages. This lead to a debate which, at some points in my opinion, got quite toxic. But the bottom line was that the arch devs haven't had the resources/volunteers to maintain all packages therefore I think your theory about them not being maintained is probably correct. If it works without any issues from your own build then I don't think you'll have anything to worry about.

If it interests you, you can always check the archives for the full discussion.

Thanks that would be great. They compile just fine from upstream so it seems there is really only a need to change the source tarballs. On 05/12/2021 07:40, George Rawlinson wrote:

On 21-12-04 10:17, TG Servers via arch-general wrote:

...

Hello,

is there any particular reason why these 2 packages are outdated since several months, or were they just not maintained? I am asking because I would need some of the newer functionality and would compile them from source otherwise. But only if there are no known problems with them. The compiles from upstream 21.09 work without any issues and I can't see of any problems, but always better to just confirm

Thanks I knew these packages sounded familiar! I was the last packager, but have not added them to my version watch-list.

I'll have a look at them at some point this week.

-- George Rawlinson

Oh yes the graphviz dep seems to be only for the gui part, I don't use that so I forgot about it. But it is part of the whole mediainfo "package" of course On 06/12/2021 04:11, George Rawlinson wrote:

On 21-12-05 08:08, TG Servers wrote:

...

Thanks that would be great. They compile just fine from upstream so it seems there is really only a need to change the source tarballs. They're now in community-testing due to a couple of changes:

* Bugfix backported from upstream[0]. * New dependency (graphviz) This is shown in the first line of the * changelog[1].

[0]: https://github.com/MediaArea/MediaInfoLib/pull/1434/commits/038dff8433053aad... [1]: https://mediaarea.net/MediaInfo/ChangeLog

-- George Rawlinson