6 ms·

In case anyone is confused with FFmpeg, ffmpeg, libav. etc., follow [0]: [0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9477115/what-are-the-differences-and-similarit

In case anyone is confused with FFmpeg, ffmpeg, libav. etc., follow [0]: [0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9477115/what-are-the-differences-and-similarities-between-ffmpeg-libav-and-avconv/9477756#9477756 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9477115/what-are-the-dif...

jaimex2 7y ago
first I've heard of any of these. I've always just apt installed ffmpeg from my distro. Works perfectly.
- Kaiyou 7y ago
  At some point in time that wouldn't have installed ffmpeg, but libav instead.
Jaepa 7y ago
So what is the difference? This comment looks to be adhomenum remarks on forks. If it’s clear and I’m just missing it, sorry i have a temp of 102.3 so I’m a little hazy.
- anoncareer0212 7y ago
  TL;DR: Use ffmpeg Man, if these reads like ad hominem, I wish you could read the whole story. The linked comment is admirably restrained to the point it prefers being confusing over explaining what happened (fwiw I have no dog in the fight, was privy to the goings-on because my project depended on ffmpeg)
  - Jaepa 7y ago
    Alright. Got it thank you.
- kuschku 7y ago
  Most of the core contributors had a fight with the project lead, so many of them left the project and forked into libav. So the community and the projects both split, and both fought about being the real one. And at first, ffmpeg focused only on features, regardless of code quality, while libav focused on clean code, even if that meant compromising on features. Obviously, people who aligned with the project lead, and people wondering why stuff suddenly didn’t work anymore, were fed up with libav. Even though it was a situation where libavs codebase was, compared to ffmpeg, much cleaner, similar to openssl vs libressl, but sacrificed a huge amount of functionality for that goal. EDIT: Rephrasing for accuracy
  - Hello71 7y ago
    I have no bone in this fight, but this is an egregiously terrible and biased summary. I will pick some of the most ridiculous points here to rebut, but a better summary could be found in literally any of the search results for "ffmpeg libav". > The project lead had a fight with all the other core contributors There was longstanding animosity between the project lead and other developers, due to a variety of reasons, mainly his dictatorial leadership style. > everyone but the lead left the project and forked into libav A small set of contributors with technical control over certain infrastructure removed the lead's access. > So the community and the projects both split, and both fought about being the real one. This contradicts your previous claim that "everyone but the lead left the project". > And at first, ffmpeg focused only on features, regardless of security, while libav focused on security and clean code, even if that meant compromising on features. This is ridiculous. libav did remove a large amount of code that was working, some of which may have been insecure or not designed well, but a lot of which was actually necessary for people's workflows and not "dead code" as they claimed. Moreover, ffmpeg had a significantly better security profile than libav due to actually patching bugs rather than waiting to do it right (which ffmpeg developers will argue was basically "doing it differently than ffmpeg"). > Even though it was a situation where libavs codebase was, compared to ffmpeg, much cleaner, similar to openssl vs libressl. It wasn't cleaner, just less. It became more and more "less" when ffmpeg gained new (well-designed) features, and libav refused to merge them just because they were not designed by libav.

jaimex2 7y ago

first I've heard of any of these. I've always just apt installed ffmpeg from my distro. Works perfectly.

Kaiyou 7y ago
At some point in time that wouldn't have installed ffmpeg, but libav instead.

Jaepa 7y ago

So what is the difference? This comment looks to be adhomenum remarks on forks. If it’s clear and I’m just missing it, sorry i have a temp of 102.3 so I’m a little hazy.

anoncareer0212 7y ago
TL;DR: Use ffmpeg Man, if these reads like ad hominem, I wish you could read the whole story. The linked comment is admirably restrained to the point it prefers being confusing over explaining what happened (fwiw I have no dog in the fight, was privy to the goings-on because my project depended on ffmpeg)
- Jaepa 7y ago
  Alright. Got it thank you.
kuschku 7y ago
Most of the core contributors had a fight with the project lead, so many of them left the project and forked into libav. So the community and the projects both split, and both fought about being the real one. And at first, ffmpeg focused only on features, regardless of code quality, while libav focused on clean code, even if that meant compromising on features. Obviously, people who aligned with the project lead, and people wondering why stuff suddenly didn’t work anymore, were fed up with libav. Even though it was a situation where libavs codebase was, compared to ffmpeg, much cleaner, similar to openssl vs libressl, but sacrificed a huge amount of functionality for that goal. EDIT: Rephrasing for accuracy
- Hello71 7y ago
  I have no bone in this fight, but this is an egregiously terrible and biased summary. I will pick some of the most ridiculous points here to rebut, but a better summary could be found in literally any of the search results for "ffmpeg libav". > The project lead had a fight with all the other core contributors There was longstanding animosity between the project lead and other developers, due to a variety of reasons, mainly his dictatorial leadership style. > everyone but the lead left the project and forked into libav A small set of contributors with technical control over certain infrastructure removed the lead's access. > So the community and the projects both split, and both fought about being the real one. This contradicts your previous claim that "everyone but the lead left the project". > And at first, ffmpeg focused only on features, regardless of security, while libav focused on security and clean code, even if that meant compromising on features. This is ridiculous. libav did remove a large amount of code that was working, some of which may have been insecure or not designed well, but a lot of which was actually necessary for people's workflows and not "dead code" as they claimed. Moreover, ffmpeg had a significantly better security profile than libav due to actually patching bugs rather than waiting to do it right (which ffmpeg developers will argue was basically "doing it differently than ffmpeg"). > Even though it was a situation where libavs codebase was, compared to ffmpeg, much cleaner, similar to openssl vs libressl. It wasn't cleaner, just less. It became more and more "less" when ffmpeg gained new (well-designed) features, and libav refused to merge them just because they were not designed by libav.