View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Lustmored Apprentice
Joined: 28 May 2010 Posts: 206 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:06 pm Post subject: libav vs ffmpeg |
|
|
Seeing recent news about ffmpeg and libav I'm a bit confused. Does it mean libav is the future of ffmpeg or is it just a fork, that develops new features, that are to be merged into ffmpeg?
Could somebody please clarify the situation, to enable making conscious choice between ffmpeg and libav?
As far as I see, some people tried to take over ffmpeg, but they've failed and they're work is merged into ffmpeg, but there still is project libav lying around. I'm really confused |
|
Back to top |
|
|
audiodef Watchman
Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 6656 Location: The soundosphere
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ppurka Advocate
Joined: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 3256
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
aCOSwt Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 Posts: 2537 Location: Hilbert space
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:52 pm Post subject: Re: libav vs ffmpeg |
|
|
Lustmored wrote: | ...I'm a bit confused. |
+1
Would this be somehow linked with the creation today of a new virtual/ffmpeg entry in portage ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gusar Advocate
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 2665 Location: Slovenia
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
libav is a fork. Some people first tried to take over ffmpeg. This didn't work, so they forked.
As to choosing between them... Well, since yesterday ffmpeg has multi-threaded decoding. It also has more video filters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lustmored Apprentice
Joined: 28 May 2010 Posts: 206 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But the first commit of virtual/ffmpeg had libav as the preferred one. That's mostly confusing part of it. Choosing a new fork as preferred than old good ffmpeg? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ant P. Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009 Posts: 6920
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
VoidMage Watchman
Joined: 14 Oct 2006 Posts: 6196
|
Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2011 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Though luck - note, that two of those people are Gentoo devs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
davidm Guru
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 Posts: 557 Location: US
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe it is technically a fork.
VoidMage wrote: |
Though luck - note, that two of those people are Gentoo devs. |
I noticed at least one. I don't know enough about the situation to take any sides at this point. I am still using the old ffmpeg but will re-evaluate again in a few months. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tomk Bodhisattva
Joined: 23 Sep 2003 Posts: 7221 Location: Sat in front of my computer
|
Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:35 pm Post subject: Re: libav vs ffmpeg |
|
|
aCOSwt wrote: | Would this be somehow linked with the creation today of a new virtual/ffmpeg entry in portage ? |
Yes, see this thread on the gentoo-dev mailing list. _________________ Search | Read | Answer | Report | Strip |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pol01 n00b
Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Libav and ffmeg are not install simultaneously.
Do I need manually mask one of them? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lustmored Apprentice
Joined: 28 May 2010 Posts: 206 Location: Poland
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, when you install one of them the second will be automatically blocked.
But I have another question - are dependencies prepared for virtual/ffmpeg? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pol01 n00b
Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lustmored wrote: | No, when you install one of them the second will be automatically blocked.
But I have another question - are dependencies prepared for virtual/ffmpeg? |
Yes, it will be, but it will be impossible update world))) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gcasillo l33t
Joined: 23 Sep 2003 Posts: 739 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pol01 wrote: | Yes, it will be, but it will be impossible update world))) |
Which is all I care about. So what's the prescription for resolving these dependencies and getting my emerges back to normal? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pol01 n00b
Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gcasillo wrote: | pol01 wrote: | Yes, it will be, but it will be impossible update world))) |
Which is all I care about. So what's the prescription for resolving these dependencies and getting my emerges back to normal? |
echo "media-video/libav" >> /etc/portage/package.mask/libav |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gcasillo l33t
Joined: 23 Sep 2003 Posts: 739 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pol01 wrote: | gcasillo wrote: | pol01 wrote: | Yes, it will be, but it will be impossible update world))) |
Which is all I care about. So what's the prescription for resolving these dependencies and getting my emerges back to normal? |
echo "media-video/libav" >> /etc/portage/package.mask/libav |
This worked for me:
Code: | echo "media-video/libav" >> /etc/portage/package.mask
echo "virtual/ffmpeg threads" >> /etc/portage/package.use |
After that, I was able to proceed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9263
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
emerging either ffmpeg or libav, whichever you prefer, would have done it, without messing around with package.mask. USE-flags must correlate between virtual and ffmpeg/libav.
Afaik packages depending on media-video/ffmpeg are not yet ready for the move to virtual/ffmpeg and libav, I had to manually move some ebuilds into a local overlay, editing DEPENDS to the virtual.
Last edited by asturm on Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
darkphader Veteran
Joined: 09 May 2002 Posts: 1225 Location: Motown
|
Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
genstorm wrote: | USE-flags must correlate between virtual and ffmpeg/libav |
That's a key.
If you don't set the use flags that are in virtual/ffmpeg to the same values for your installed ffmpeg or libav then you will always see blockers as emerge will try to install the other package. _________________ WYSIWYG - What You See Is What You Grep |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papu l33t
Joined: 25 Jan 2008 Posts: 729 Location: Sota algun pi o alzina...
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
in my case and system , only chromium depends on media-video/ffmpeg , it don't detect virtual/ffmpeg, at this time, and make conflict wiht media-video/libva and ffmpeg, then what it's better option to use?
Quote: | av www-client/chromium
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies ... done!
[ebuild N ] media-video/ffmpeg-0.6_p25767 USE="3dnow 3dnowext X alsa bzip2 encode hardcoded-tables mmx mmxext mp3 sdl ssse3 threads v4l2 vorbis zlib (-altivec) -amr -bindist -cpudetection -custom-cflags -debug -dirac -doc -faac -frei0r -gsm -ieee1394 -jack -jpeg2k -network -oss -pic -qt-faststart -rtmp -schroedinger -speex -static-libs -test -theora -v4l -vaapi -vdpau -vpx -x264 -xvid" VIDEO_CARDS="-nvidia" 3,907 kB
[ebuild N ] www-client/chromium-11.0.696.16 USE="cups -gnome -gnome-keyring -test" 140,736 kB
[blocks B ] media-video/ffmpeg ("media-video/ffmpeg" is blocking media-video/libav-0.7_pre20110327)
Total: 2 packages (2 new), Size of downloads: 144,643 kB
Conflict: 1 block (1 unsatisfied)
* Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
* installed at the same time on the same system.
(media-video/ffmpeg-0.6_p25767::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>=media-video/ffmpeg-0.6_p25767[threads] required by (www-client/chromium-11.0.696.16::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(media-video/libav-0.7_pre20110327::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
media-video/libav[X,encode,mp3,sdl,-theora,threads,-vaapi,-vdpau,-x264] required by (virtual/ffmpeg-0::gentoo, installed) |
thanks, adéu. _________________ --so ~amd64 & openrc --cpu 7700 non-x --ram 2x16GB --gpu RX 470 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jbouzan Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 23 Nov 2007 Posts: 138
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
You can wait for the chromium maintainer to make the dependency on virtual/ffmpeg instead of media-video/ffmpeg, or copy the ebuild to a local overlay (with a revision number bump) and modify that line in the dependencies yourself. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
askoff Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 77
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And which one of these contains the ffmpeg-mt patch/feature?
EDIT: I see. So it's the original ffmpeg package. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lxg Veteran
Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Posts: 1019 Location: Aachen, Germany
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gcasillo wrote: | This worked for me:
Code: | echo "media-video/libav" >> /etc/portage/package.mask
echo "virtual/ffmpeg threads" >> /etc/portage/package.use |
After that, I was able to proceed. |
The latter line appears to be sufficient. (YMMV) _________________ lxg.de – codebits and tech talk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keba Guru
Joined: 02 Jun 2006 Posts: 328 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been reading into this, and now I'm not sure which one (Ffmpeg or Libav) I'd better install. So I'm wondering, as objectively as possible, which one is better for the future. :
1) Which one has more (main) developers? (More main developers => faster development)
2) Is there any difference between the two as of now? What are plans for the future of both projects? (They only say something about more improvement on their web pages...)
3) Is Libav fully compatible to ffmpeg, I mean can ffmpeg be fully replaced yet or not (that is if I choose to replace it)?
4) Which one do you recommend?
That should help to choose... Thanks in advance _________________ Prayer can change the world! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
forrestfunk81 Guru
Joined: 07 Feb 2006 Posts: 567 Location: münchen.de
|
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FYI Scarabeus bloged about this:
Quote: |
I’ve added media-video/libav ebuild, which is fork of good old ffmpeg. In order to let you users decide what you want to use there also is virtual package called virtual/ffmpeg (which is now being integrated into ebuilds and updated back to versioned virtuals [currently there is just one virtual/ffmpeg with no version specified]) so when everything is migrated to it you can decide yourself if you want the old ffmpeg or the new libav.
The media-video/mplayer2 was added by Luca (lu_zero), but I removed the internal ffmpeg linking since this thing can link to your system ffmpeg (yay!). This change can make quite few of you unhappy because the internal ffmpeg was already ffmpeg-mt (threads!!!!), but technicaly with external linking you can just alter your ffmpeg to be whatever you want it and use the threading features in all apps linking against it. Given that I already like and use mplayer2 and I was the guy who did most snapshot bumps in mplayer1 lately it might be good idea for you lads (at least those in testing) to move with me |
_________________ # cd /pub/
# more beer |
|
Back to top |
|
|
krinn Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470
|
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this is the worst thing i've saw, an howto be like oracle while been opensource...
pretty lame and they should be ashame.
if i understood the story (always hard to really catch all, i'm sure even them aren't sure of everything), some of them were disagreeing the dictator guy was reviewing the code and mostly reject it because "not as good as he could do it", ending with others devs loosing faith.
And because they think they could own the name, they fork and try to grab ffmpeg name and structure (as they were admin the servers), all that just to remove the commiter/reviewer !
Pretty lame, could understand why they do it, coudln't get why they do it like that! Just to remove this guy, was he so dictator that noone could remove him ?
Could understand also why they wish grab the project name, because all users knew that name, while libav will start from 0 on popularity, but it's like they cheat us, without letting us choose. A bit insulting: don't let user choose, they're too dumb, let's just keep the name they will follow like sheeps.
Now if the dictator don't change his habit we should have
- ffmpeg = slow evolution+more speed/stability because of strict coding politic the guy use
- libav = fast evolution, less stability as they (still if i understood clear) wish more functions to be push even not well review/test (still the code will be stabilize and optimize, but later)
On paper, libav should gave better results if they don't put anarchy and build 2 branch unstable/stable
I should go with libav, i will just wait to see if they really could handle it, big project always need a main man (or men) to drive everyone to the right path. I just hope they get away with some guys that could do that instead of just coding. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|