[FFmpeg-user] using an audio+video filter at the same time

Carl Eugen Hoyos cehoyos at ag.or.at
Thu Jul 19 08:15:08 CEST 2012

Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans <at> guardianproject.info> writes:

> > The thread is a good example of the many lies the Debian 
> > maintainers are made to believe, it is sad that we have not 
> > been informed at the time about it;-(
> Can you explain?  I don't understand what are the many lies.

Reading the thread, I would assume that it is unavoidable that 
FFmpeg and the mentioned fork are incompatible. The truth is 
that the FFmpeg maintainer does really everything (even silly 
things) to keep compatibility and make our libraries 
replacements for the forks' (and we have not yet received any 
reports about incompatibility). Note that I am not saying that 
we are compatible in every respect (the fork lately began to 
commit broken functions using the name of - afaict non-broken - 
functions already used in FFmpeg that are incompatible), but that 
this to a very high degree is not our fault (nor is it unavoidable, 
the developers who were less involved originally tried hard to 
avoid such incompatibilities).

The thread claims that it is impossible to deploy FFmpeg alongside 
with the fork and that this is unneeded because the fork "already 
provides ffmpeg". (In this context, I consider the latter a really, 
really bad thing to write.) Fact is that the default compilation 
of FFmpeg provides static binaries that could of course without any 
change be provided.
I strongly believe that the fork providing intentionally broken 
binaries called "FFmpeg" that contain several hundred known 
regressions (some of them security relevant, a few possibly 
exploitable) at the same time announcing it will be removed does not 
need further comments (especially if this is used as an argument why 
FFmpeg cannot be provided).

This finally leads to the "all is well" attitude - if you simply 
ignore bug-reports, all is of course well!

(Totally leaving out the "there is nothing missing in the fork" 
argument. The people working hard on libavfilter for several months 
without being payed by the money collected under the "FFmpeg" name 
could probably comment. The money was unfortunately used to provide 
some of the forks' incompatibilities.)

> > https://dev.guardianproject.info/attachments/48/vf_redact.c
> > This filter unfortunately has a license issue afaict;-(
> I'm working with Andrew Senior.  The plan is to ultimately get it
> incorporated into ffmpeg under whatever license is easiest for ffmpeg.

That is great, what is missing is a license header (afaict - IANAL - 
we have to assume that all rights are reserved if it says 
"Copyright (c) 2011 Andrew Senior"), you can either copy a LGPL header 
from another file, or choose a less restricting license (MIT).

Carl Eugen

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list