[aur-general] Shall I move mplayer-vaapi to [community]?
ulf at winkelvos.de
Tue Aug 17 09:22:16 EDT 2010
Am Dienstag, den 17.08.2010, 08:23 +0200 schrieb Ionuț Bîru
<ibiru at archlinux.org>:
> On 08/17/2010 05:14 AM, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>> I've been using mplayer-vaapi  with my Radeon HD 4200 IGP for a
>> couple of months now and I think it's a very useful package. Recently,
>> its maintainer in the AUR dropped it because he switched to libvdpau.
>> So, I've been thinking of adopting it and moving it to [community].
>> I haven't done anything yet, as I'm a bit unsure of whether I should
>> go forward with the move. On one hand, a binary package for
>> mplayer-vaapi is included in the unofficial, but well maintained,
>> catalyst repo , but on the other hand it still is a useful package
>> and it only has an additional dependency on libva (available in
>> [extra]) compared to the straight mplayer package; it'd be nice to
>> have it in [community].
> Thomas would be very happy to have this in our repos. :) I don't have
> any particular issues with it but this open a road in which we allowed
> patched applications in our repos.
> This patch wasn't accepted upstream by mplayer devs yet.
Last time i checked there weren't even any recent discussion on the
mailing-list. There was some discussion between Gwenole (libva-sds dev) and
the mplayer dev team last year... So far libva(sds-patched) is supported by
ffmpeg, but the output related things are not in mplayer. Would be an
interesting thing to know, if there still is hope for the rest of Gwenole's
patches to be accepeted.
If you, Evangelos, decide to move this to community, you should however
leave the lazy road i took with this package! :) I.e. apply the sds patches
to arch's current mplayer source snapshot, instead of simply building the
full sds-patched mplayer source. I ran into dependency troubles several
times and had to hack around that, or wait until some deps were updated.
I think, as Ionuț stated, this is rather "political thing" to discuss, but
the package itself. The package has always worked pretty good for me,
except for minor issues with subtitle-rendering and there have not been
many complaints in the comments, that I remember.
More information about the aur-general