Bug#345489: [PATCH] Add support for spc plugin in EXTRA_PLUGINS
lool at dooz.org
Sun Jan 8 10:49:46 UTC 2006
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Using a library is a certainly a reasonable idea; two questions:
> 1) Do you mean "libspc" (which I haven't heard of and can't seem to
> find) or libopenspc?
I meant libopenspc indeed.
> 2) Anti Resonance's SPC emulator is generally considered the most
> technically superior, both on the grounds of faithful reproduction and
> possible enhancement; given that Anti Resonance's code and libopenspc
> are equally non-portable, I don't think it's worth moving to a library
> unless that library gives some other advantage.
It seems reasonable to build against a shared library to ease security
> That's a more serious concern; however, the code appears to be Freely
> licensed by upstream. Can you point to any particular issue or concern
> you have, or that you've seen raised previously?
No, I walked through the 0.8 bugs looking for things possibly obsolete
in 0.10, and wanted to give you some feedback on the discussions I
recall about that plugin.
This was both on IRC and in the mailing-lists IIRC.
> I did notice that spc didn't seem to be present in 0.10.
I think this is due to stricter policy upstream: plugin have to be
maintained actively by one person and blessed by some gstreamer hacker.
I think SPC lacks the active maintenance right now.
> > If you fixed configure.ac by:
> > -GST_DOC()
> > +GST_DOCBOOK_CHECK()
> > Then this might be worthwhile to send upstream, could you explain how
> > it break things to call GST_DOC instead of GST_DOCBOOK_CHECK? I
> > certainly see it is wrong, but I had no problem with it until now.
> I think it has already been fixed upstream, in newer versions than the
> one currently in Debian. The issue is that GST_DOC was renamed to
> GST_DOCBOOK_CHECK, but configure.ac wasn't updated accordingly. This
> caused the immediately subsequent code to fail, which happened to be the
> code which checked the target CPU to determine which arch-specific code
> was acceptable; since SPC needs those target CPU variables set, it fails
> unless this issue is fixed.
Ok, I saw the rename in 0.10, but I only saw the GST_DOC() call in
configure today. I'm likely to reupload a package to address that.
> Might it be possible to include this EXTRA_PLUGINS support until spc can
> be sufficiently fixed to be more suitable for building by default? It
> would make enhancing and testing gstreamer0.8-spc significantly easier.
That I've done in -4, but you replied faster than I uploaded. :-P
Loïc Minier <lool at dooz.org>
Current Earth status: NOT DESTROYED
More information about the Pkg-gstreamer-maintainers