3 ms·
> It's entirely possible to maintain both packages in Debian with the alternatives framework. The Debian security team vetoed this option, which is why the rec
by _delirium 11y ago
> It's entirely possible to maintain both packages in Debian with the alternatives framework.
The Debian security team vetoed this option, which is why the recent discussion was choosing between, 1) bring back ffmpeg and remove libav, or 2) keep libav and do not bring back ffmpeg (option 1 was chosen). They don't want to support security patches for both, and for all combinations of software that might use either one.
- listic 11y ago> The Debian security team vetoed this option On what grounds?
- _delirium 11y agoThe high frequency of security issues in both packages makes it a significant burden to support both of them simultaneously: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/02/msg00668.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/02/msg00668.html There appear to also be issues with frequent soname bumps: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/02/msg00651.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/02/msg00651.html
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- davidgerard 11y agoThis is answered in the article this post is about.
- zimbatm 11y agoGood point. Reality is more fine-grained than the account of my own perception. Do you know if contrib packages are also getting security updates ? If no then why didn't they just move the ffmpeg package there. To me it felt like the really wanted the ffmpeg package to be virtual and pointing to libav.
- yrro 11y agocontrib is not for unsupported packages. It is for free software that depends on non-free software.