9:20 a.m.
Greetings everyone,
TL;DR
Will there be AVIF (AV1) support for applications using libheif in Fedora?
A while ago I stumbled upon AVIF files not being supported by
applications (gThumb, ImageMagick, GIMP) in Fedora [1].
It appears that the applications mentioned have switched to libheif for
AVIF support in favor of libavif. Since libheif also provides/requires
patent encumbered libraries/codecs (libde265) related to HEIF it is
provided by RPMFusion.
AVIF, however, is not encumbered by patents as I understand it [2]. So
it seems we need a compatibility libheif-av1 or the like to allow
applications provided by fedora repos to enable AVIF (AV1) support using
libheif [3].
I found two threads ([4],[5]) in the archives regarding HEIF and AVIF.
But none of them are conclusive with regards to enabling AVIF support.
Are there any plans to enable AVIF support in applications that use
libheif as their provider? If so, where can I find information regarding
the status?
I apologize in advance if any of the above is not entirely correct (or
entirely incorrect). Aim of my message is to better understand why
support for AVIF is lacking in some applications and if that can be fixed.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165606
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164329#c3
[3] This part is not entirely clear to me. Please correct me.
[4]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
[5]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
Cheers,
Sandro
--
Sandro
FAS: gui1ty
IRC: Penguinpee
Elsewhere: [Pp]enguinpee
9:27 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:20 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
Greetings everyone,
TL;DR
Will there be AVIF (AV1) support for applications using libheif in Fedora?
A while ago I stumbled upon AVIF files not being supported by
applications (gThumb, ImageMagick, GIMP) in Fedora [1].
It appears that the applications mentioned have switched to libheif for
AVIF support in favor of libavif. Since libheif also provides/requires
patent encumbered libraries/codecs (libde265) related to HEIF it is
provided by RPMFusion.
AVIF, however, is not encumbered by patents as I understand it [2]. So
it seems we need a compatibility libheif-av1 or the like to allow
applications provided by fedora repos to enable AVIF (AV1) support using
libheif [3].
I found two threads ([4],[5]) in the archives regarding HEIF and AVIF.
But none of them are conclusive with regards to enabling AVIF support.
Are there any plans to enable AVIF support in applications that use
libheif as their provider? If so, where can I find information regarding
the status?
I apologize in advance if any of the above is not entirely correct (or
entirely incorrect). Aim of my message is to better understand why
support for AVIF is lacking in some applications and if that can be fixed.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165606
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164329#c3
[3] This part is not entirely clear to me. Please correct me.
[4]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
[5]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
RPM Fusion.
Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
default anymore:
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
9:03 a.m.
On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:20 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl>
wrote:
>
> Greetings everyone,
>
> TL;DR
> Will there be AVIF (AV1) support for applications using libheif in
> Fedora?
>
> A while ago I stumbled upon AVIF files not being supported by
> applications (gThumb, ImageMagick, GIMP) in Fedora [1].
>
> It appears that the applications mentioned have switched to libheif
> for
> AVIF support in favor of libavif. Since libheif also
> provides/requires
> patent encumbered libraries/codecs (libde265) related to HEIF it is
> provided by RPMFusion.
>
> AVIF, however, is not encumbered by patents as I understand it [2].
> So
> it seems we need a compatibility libheif-av1 or the like to allow
> applications provided by fedora repos to enable AVIF (AV1) support
> using
> libheif [3].
>
> I found two threads ([4],[5]) in the archives regarding HEIF and
> AVIF.
> But none of them are conclusive with regards to enabling AVIF
> support.
>
> Are there any plans to enable AVIF support in applications that use
> libheif as their provider? If so, where can I find information
> regarding
> the status?
>
> I apologize in advance if any of the above is not entirely correct
> (or
> entirely incorrect). Aim of my message is to better understand why
> support for AVIF is lacking in some applications and if that can be
> fixed.
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165606
> [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164329#c3
> [3] This part is not entirely clear to me. Please correct me.
> [4]
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
> [5]
>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
>
It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
RPM Fusion.
Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
default anymore:
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
third repo as a freeworld package ?
Thanks
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Sérgio M. B.
9:05 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:20 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings everyone,
> >
> > TL;DR
> > Will there be AVIF (AV1) support for applications using libheif in
> > Fedora?
> >
> > A while ago I stumbled upon AVIF files not being supported by
> > applications (gThumb, ImageMagick, GIMP) in Fedora [1].
> >
> > It appears that the applications mentioned have switched to libheif
> > for
> > AVIF support in favor of libavif. Since libheif also
> > provides/requires
> > patent encumbered libraries/codecs (libde265) related to HEIF it is
> > provided by RPMFusion.
> >
> > AVIF, however, is not encumbered by patents as I understand it [2].
> > So
> > it seems we need a compatibility libheif-av1 or the like to allow
> > applications provided by fedora repos to enable AVIF (AV1) support
> > using
> > libheif [3].
> >
> > I found two threads ([4],[5]) in the archives regarding HEIF and
> > AVIF.
> > But none of them are conclusive with regards to enabling AVIF
> > support.
> >
> > Are there any plans to enable AVIF support in applications that use
> > libheif as their provider? If so, where can I find information
> > regarding
> > the status?
> >
> > I apologize in advance if any of the above is not entirely correct
> > (or
> > entirely incorrect). Aim of my message is to better understand why
> > support for AVIF is lacking in some applications and if that can be
> > fixed.
> >
> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165606
> > [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164329#c3
> > [3] This part is not entirely clear to me. Please correct me.
> > [4]
> >
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
> > [5]
> >
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
> >
>
> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
> RPM Fusion.
>
> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
> default anymore:
>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>
> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
third repo as a freeworld package ?
It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
6:17 p.m.
Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other things...
On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto
<sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
<snip>
>>
>> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
>> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
>> RPM Fusion.
>>
>> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
>> default anymore:
>>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>>
>> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package and
getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-ordination with
RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages would need to
be updated to properly use the new library.
If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
> So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you
propose
> make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
> third repo as a freeworld package ?
>
It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about making
libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play nicely
together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265) provided by
RPMFusion.
To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1 only
libheif package and take it from there.
-- Sandro
6:34 p.m.
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 7:17 PM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other things...
On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
<snip>
>>>
>>> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
>>> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
>>> RPM Fusion.
>>>
>>> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
>>> default anymore:
>>>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>>>
>>> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package and
getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-ordination with
RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages would need to
be updated to properly use the new library.
If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
>> So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
>> make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
>> third repo as a freeworld package ?
>>
>
> It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
> libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about making
libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play nicely
together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265) provided by
RPMFusion.
To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1 only
libheif package and take it from there.
Actually, I've got this done already locally. I can put it up for
review and you can grab it?
Then I can give you co-maintainer privileges for it.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
5:44 a.m.
On 15-03-2023 01:04, Leigh Scott wrote:
I can give sponsorship and acl's for the rpmfusion package.
Thanks, Leigh. I take it that would be needed for updating the current
libheif, of which you are one of the maintainers.
I do have an RPMFusion Bugzilla account already and I will join the
mailing list shortly. I believe we "met" before. ;)
-- Sandro
5:32 a.m.
On 15-03-2023 00:34, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 7:17 PM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl>
wrote:
>
> Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other things...
>
> On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>>
>>>> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we could
>>>> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin in
>>>> RPM Fusion.
>>>>
>>>> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built by
>>>> default anymore:
>>>>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>>>>
>>>> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
>
> I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package and
> getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-ordination with
> RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages would need to
> be updated to properly use the new library.
>
> If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
>
>>> So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
>>> make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
>>> third repo as a freeworld package ?
>>>
>>
>> It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
>> libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
>
> The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about making
> libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play nicely
> together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265) provided by
> RPMFusion.
>
> To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1 only
> libheif package and take it from there.
>
Actually, I've got this done already locally. I can put it up for
review and you can grab it?
Then I can give you co-maintainer privileges for it.
Sure. That will work. Thanks Neal!
-- Sandro
6:54 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 6:32 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
On 15-03-2023 00:34, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 7:17 PM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other things...
>>
>> On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we
could
>>>>> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin
in
>>>>> RPM Fusion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built
by
>>>>> default anymore:
>>>>>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>>>>>
>>>>> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
>>
>> I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package and
>> getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-ordination with
>> RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages would need to
>> be updated to properly use the new library.
>>
>> If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
>>
>>>> So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
>>>> make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
>>>> third repo as a freeworld package ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
>>> libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
>>
>> The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about making
>> libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play nicely
>> together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265) provided by
>> RPMFusion.
>>
>> To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1 only
>> libheif package and take it from there.
>>
>
> Actually, I've got this done already locally. I can put it up for
> review and you can grab it?
>
> Then I can give you co-maintainer privileges for it.
Sure. That will work. Thanks Neal!
Here it is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2178600
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
7:02 a.m.
On Wed, 2023-03-15 at 07:54 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 6:32 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl>
wrote:
>
> On 15-03-2023 00:34, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 7:17 PM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other
> > > things...
> > >
> > > On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto
> > > > <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture,
> > > > > > so we could
> > > > > > move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265
> > > > > > backend plugin in
> > > > > > RPM Fusion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are
> > > > > > not built by
> > > > > > default anymore:
> > > > > >
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
> > >
> > > I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package
> > > and
> > > getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-
> > > ordination with
> > > RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages
> > > would need to
> > > be updated to properly use the new library.
> > >
> > > If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
> > >
> > > > > So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you
> > > > > propose
> > > > > make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the
> > > > > plugin on
> > > > > third repo as a freeworld package ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link
> > > > to
> > > > libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
> > >
> > > The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about
> > > making
> > > libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play
> > > nicely
> > > together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265)
> > > provided by
> > > RPMFusion.
> > >
> > > To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1
> > > only
> > > libheif package and take it from there.
> > >
> >
> > Actually, I've got this done already locally. I can put it up for
> > review and you can grab it?
> >
> > Then I can give you co-maintainer privileges for it.
>
> Sure. That will work. Thanks Neal!
>
Here it is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2178600
LGTM
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Sérgio M. B.
8:27 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 6:32 AM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
On 15-03-2023 00:34, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 7:17 PM Sandro <lists(a)penguinpee.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Apologies for my late response. I have been swamped with other things...
>>
>> On 27-02-2023 16:05, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:04 AM Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 10:27 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like libheif now supports a plugin architecture, so we
could
>>>>> move libheif to Fedora, while having the HEVC/H.265 backend plugin
in
>>>>> RPM Fusion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, according to the CMake, the HEVC/H.265 plugins are not built
by
>>>>> default anymore:
>>>>>
https://github.com/strukturag/libheif/blob/cdcc5b210879e0a0348032a594f8be...
>>>>>
>>>>> So feel free to package it and bring it into Fedora. :)
>>
>> I'm willing to give it a try. Yet, just submitting the package and
>> getting it into Fedora is probably not enough. Some co-ordination with
>> RPMFusion would be needed, I guess. And consuming packages would need to
>> be updated to properly use the new library.
>>
>> If anyone could guide/assist me with that, I'd be grateful.
>>
>>>> So we can build libheif without H.265 on Fedora but how you propose
>>>> make H.265 available with one third repo ? just build the plugin on
>>>> third repo as a freeworld package ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may be possible to build the plugin independently and link to
>>> libheif, but at the minimum, that's what I expect.
>>
>> The above exchange I do not quite grasp. I guess this is about making
>> libheif-av1 (the Av1 only libheif, yet to be packaged) play nicely
>> together with the unfree libheif (providing HEIF/libde265) provided by
>> RPMFusion.
>>
>> To set things in motion I will try my hands on building a AV1 only
>> libheif package and take it from there.
>>
>
> Actually, I've got this done already locally. I can put it up for
> review and you can grab it?
>
> Then I can give you co-maintainer privileges for it.
Sure. That will work. Thanks Neal!
This is now done with the new package heading to all Fedora stable
releases and EPEL 9:
* F38: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-00a7fd4c67
* F37: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-fca0992d0e
* F36: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-30d47d0fcc
* EPEL9: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5ac211d78f
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
2:40 a.m.
I have orphaned libheif at rpmfusion as I have no desire to manage another split package.
https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/package/free/libheif/
4:39 p.m.
On Saturday, 18 March 2023 at 08:40, Leigh Scott wrote:
I have orphaned libheif at rpmfusion as I have no desire to manage
another split package.
https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/package/free/libheif/
Thanks for the link. Picked up.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
7:14 a.m.
On 18-03-2023 22:39, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Saturday, 18 March 2023 at 08:40, Leigh Scott wrote:
> I have orphaned libheif at rpmfusion as I have no desire to manage
> another split package.
>
> https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/package/free/libheif/
Thanks for the link. Picked up.
I'd like to give a big Thank You! to everyone involved. Neil, thanks for
packaging. Dominik, thanks for reviewing and picking up the RPMFusion
package. Leigh, thanks for having maintained libheif all this time.
Kalev, thanks for following along and updating gThumb, promptly[1].
That's where it all started and the circle is now complete.
Dominik, since you picked up the RPMFusion package, which conflicts with
the new Fedora package, could you bring me up to speed what needs (is
planned to) happen with the RPMFusion package?
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165606
-- Sandro
9:59 a.m.
Hi there,
On 2023-03-19 08:14, Sandro wrote:
Dominik, since you picked up the RPMFusion package, which conflicts
with
the new Fedora package, could you bring me up to speed what needs (is
planned to) happen with the RPMFusion package
The Fedora packaged libheif came
through as a stable update yesterday,
replaced the RPMFusion one and broke my ability to work with any HEIC
encoded images with no way of installing a version that works from
RPMFusion.
I understand that RPMFusion is not an officially supported or endorsed
repository.
Given that there seems to have been at least some effort in trying to
coordinate this I was wondering if it was intentional to move forward
without having fully coordinated an RPMFusion split-package scenario?
Regards,
Felix
11:08 a.m.
Hi, Sandro.
On Sunday, 19 March 2023 at 13:14, Sandro wrote:
[...]
Dominik, since you picked up the RPMFusion package, which conflicts
with the new Fedora package, could you bring me up to speed what needs
(is planned to) happen with the RPMFusion package?
For now, the Fedora package has a higher NEVRA, so the RPM Fusion
package will be updated by the Fedora one.
Going forward, I'm going to turn it into an add-on package, i.e. ship
only the two plugins we can't ship in Fedora:
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
1:39 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 7:29 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On 20/03/2023 17:08, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Going forward, I'm going to turn it into an add-on package, i.e. ship
> only the two plugins we can't ship in Fedora:
In a subpackage libheif-freeworld?
I think it would look cleaner to name them according to the plugins, so
that it would be:
%files -n libheif-libde265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%files -n libheif-x265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
and then add reverse soft deps from the newly added packages to the libheif
package so that they'd get pulled in when enabling rpmfusion. Although
thinking about it some more, there was a somewhat recent dnf change that
made it not pull in newly added soft deps, so maybe this approach would not
work so well after all, at least not to automatically pull in the extra
plugins ...
Anyway, libheif-freeworld sounds to me more like something that would
replace the entire libheif package with an alternative version. In this
case, it's only two additional plugins and I think it would be better to
avoid the -freeworld pattern here.
--
Kalev
2 p.m.
As a workaround until the dust settles, I did a dnf downgrade of libheif and added an
exclude in dnf.conf. I'll revert that when the add-ons are published.
Steve
On 3/20/23 02:39 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 7:29 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>> wrote:
On 20/03/2023 17:08, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Going forward, I'm going to turn it into an add-on package, i.e. ship
> only the two plugins we can't ship in Fedora:
In a subpackage libheif-freeworld?
I think it would look cleaner to name them according to the plugins, so that it would
be:
%files -n libheif-libde265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%files -n libheif-x265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
and then add reverse soft deps from the newly added packages to the libheif package so
that they'd get pulled in when enabling rpmfusion. Although thinking about it some
more, there was a somewhat recent dnf change that made it not pull in newly added soft
deps, so maybe this approach would not work so well after all, at least not to
automatically pull in the extra plugins ...
Anyway, libheif-freeworld sounds to me more like something that would replace the entire
libheif package with an alternative version. In this case, it's only two additional
plugins and I think it would be better to avoid the -freeworld pattern here.
--
Kalev
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
2:32 p.m.
On 20/03/2023 19:39, Kalev Lember wrote:
I think it would look cleaner to name them according to the plugins,
so
that it would be:
%files -n libheif-libde265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%files -n libheif-x265
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
Or this:
%files -n libheif-heic
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
2:38 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 3:34 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On 20/03/2023 19:39, Kalev Lember wrote:
> I think it would look cleaner to name them according to the plugins, so
> that it would be:
>
> %files -n libheif-libde265
> %{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
>
> %files -n libheif-x265
> %{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
Or this:
%files -n libheif-heic
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-libde265.so
%{_libdir}/libheif/libheif-x265.so
The spec file already has libheif-hevc. That should be sufficient for
the subpackage that Dominik will make in RPM Fusion.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
5:30 p.m.
On Sat, 2023-03-18 at 07:40 +0000, Leigh Scott wrote:
I have orphaned libheif at rpmfusion as I have no desire to manage
another split package.
https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/package/free/libheif/
you should orphan only branches that are in Fedora , IMO
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Sérgio M. B.
3:55 p.m.
libheif has been retired at rpmfusion due to koji issues.
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6626
10:33 a.m.
Ok we need rename it to freeworld
On Fri, 2023-04-07 at 20:55 +0000, Leigh Scott wrote:
libheif has been retired at rpmfusion due to koji issues.
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6626
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Sérgio M. B.
380
days inactive
423
days old
24 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Felix Kaechele -
Kalev Lember -
Leigh Scott -
Neal Gompa -
Sandro -
Steven A. Falco -
Sérgio Basto -
Vitaly Zaitsev