On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 02:03:21 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:41:22 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote: > > > > > We certainly don't need ANOTHER media player, but we need a good media > > > player! I have a large mp3 collection, and I am dependant upon a media > > > library. Amarok's media library with not dispay hebrew, so I am stuck > > > (in the meantime) with the harddisk with the music (20 gig) on my > > > wife's windows box and playing music in Windows Media Player 10. Need > > > I stress how bad I want it on my box?!? If I can't build Juk, then can > > > someone reccomend to me a media player with a good library function? > > > > As an update here, current spec file for kdemultimedia in Core is broken > > with regard to building Juk. Additionally, it would not just need > > taglib-devel from Extras as a build dependency, but libtunepimp-devel, > > which is neither included in Core nor Extras. > > > > I think it would be a plan for a package maintainer with interest in Juk > > to get it (and additional build requirements) included in Extras as a > > package named "juk". It could build from the same patched kdemultimedia > > source tarball as included in Core. > > > > I have no experience in that sort of thing, but if the learning curve > is not too steep, then I wouldn't mind doing it. Before I go googleing > and poking around, is this a newbie-freindly excersize? No. A newbie-friendly exercise would be to try creating a small package, something without pitfalls. Juk, on the contrary, would be built from the kdemultimedia source tarball, which is used for Fedora Core, too. The packager would build and install just every piece needed for Juk and avoid file conflicts with the Core kdemultimedia package. Additionally, the source tarball is patched as to delete software with patenting/licensing issues. And last, since KDE may be subject to security issues, the package maintainer would need to monitor Core's KDE updates and provide updates for Juk whenever it is affected, too. I would support anybody who wants to get Juk and libtunepimp included in Extras, though. I just don't want to maintain the package myself. > Because I > would just love to do something good for the Fedora community. Would > the extras/core/livna repros be appropriate to keep the package, or > would dag be better? I can't tell whether Dag accepts packages not made by himself. Extras would be ideal, IMHO, although other developers might find it rather ugly to rebuild a modified Core src.rpm only for a missing application. But this ought to be discussed on fedora-extras-list. Livna would work, too, as it is an open community project, but since packages built at Livna have access to packages with patenting/licensing issues, the package developer would want to avoid conflicts also with the kdemultimedia-extras package (which provides audio and video plugins for KDE). -- Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Core release 5 (Development) - Linux 2.6.12-1.1434_FC5 loadavg: 1.12 1.19 1.08
Attachment:
pgpNA5IMHLVkG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
