[Mageia-dev] rehashing the faac issue

Tue Oct 30 10:16:22 CET 2012

Malo <pierre-malo.denielou at rhul.ac.uk> writes:
+
+> On 30/10/12 08:20, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
+>> Le 30/10/2012 01:34, Frank Griffin a écrit :
+>>> On 10/29/2012 06:20 PM, Olivier Blin wrote:
+>>>> I would prefer B: adding a nonfree-tainted repo (+ its
+>>>> updates/testing/backports/debug brothers).
+[...]
+>>> I don't know what's involved in this, but it is certainly the optimal
+>>> solution.
+>> Creating a specific workflow (a new buildsystem queue, a new entry in
+>> package manager configuration, etc...) for a category of packages with a
+>> unique candidate is not precisely something I'd call 'optimal'. Unless
+>> in term of complexity.
+>>
+>> Morevoer, unless someone volonteers to actually implement it in our
+>> buildsystem, that's a purely hypothetical solution.
+
+That's pretty easy to add in the BS, IIRC, it's about creating the dirs
+in the repo, modifying media.cfg, and youri + iurt config files.
+
+And maybe one-line to patch in Rpmdrake::Gui to recognize that
+nonfree-tainted is not free software (but it looks already broken
+anyway).
+
+> I'd have to go with Guillaume on that one.
+> The inclusion of faac came up a long time ago, and the simple logical
+> answer is to created a tainted-non-free repos.
+>
+> However, the three problems with that solution are:
+> - there is only a handful of people at Mageia who can do that, and
+> none of them actually did it.
+
+Maybe because Mageia sysadmins are not always dictators and act upon the
+input of other teams.
+Pascal and I will be able to do it.
+
+> - there is only faac, so why bother? (fuelling the first reason)
+> - the reason that philippe mentioned: is having 3 versions of each
+> multimedia package really worth it? ...
+
+Yep, it's only worth the clarity it offers in media descriptions...
+
+-- 
+Olivier Blin - blino
+