VLC 2 for SL6 / RHEL6 / Centos 6

[redman]

QUOTE (tux99 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:10 AM)

... Redhat is almost completely ignoring bug reports with regards to audio/video packages... <snip> I can understand that Redhat doesn't really care about A/V packages as they make their money with server installs where these packages never get installed ...

Agreed, they are less "motivated" because they KNOW they are helping the clones instead.
Unfortunately they forget that the clones also help Red Hat by more feedback ...

[tux99]

QUOTE (joka @ Apr 28 2012, 12:01 AM)

Y 2nd minor problem is that watching TV (DVB-T) does not work - in contrast to the Puias version. Is there a plugin missing?

Hi joka, could this be your problem?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vlc/+bug/982953

Do you have a valid channels.conf file?

Like I said I don't have a PC TV tuner and have never used DVB-T on a PC so you need to describe the problem in more detail as I have no idea what you normally do to use DVB-T in vlc.

Or it could maybe be due to this bug:
http://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=98242

[joka]

Ooops.

I can't reproduce my DVB-T problem anymore. DVB-T is working now with VLC 2.0.0!
I have never used VLC to scan channels. My favorite tool to generate a channels.conf is w_scan (available preliminary from the Fedora 13 repos).

[joka]

QUOTE (tux99 @ Apr 28 2012, 07:10 AM)

There are two packages in the linuxtech-release repo that replace EL6 packages, gstreamer-plugins-bad replaces the gstreamer-plugins-bad-free from EL6 and libvpx-0.9.6 replaces the old libvpx-0.9.0 from EL6. I agree with you that 3rd party packages should never overwrite or replace base packages and that's why I created linuxtech-backports. But in the case of gstreamer-plugins-bad and libvpx I made exceptions because Redhat is almost completely ignoring bug reports with regards to audio/video packages...

Thanks for the explanations. However, I would suggest to add a remark to the readme file(s) of your linuxtech repos. Some users may use yum-plugin-{protectbase|priorities} to protect their base repositories.
Therefore I've added a line:

CODE

exclude=gstreamer-plugins-* libvpx

to my base repos.

[tux99]

QUOTE (joka @ May 1 2012, 11:34 PM)

Ooops. I can't reproduce my DVB-T problem anymore. DVB-T is working now with VLC 2.0.0! I have never used VLC to scan channels. My favorite tool to generate a channels.conf is w_scan (available preliminary from the Fedora 13 repos).

Well, I'm glad it works, not least because it saved me from having to debug the issue!

[tux99]

QUOTE (tux99 @ Apr 28 2012, 09:04 AM)

QUOTE (tux99 @ Mar 28 2012, 01:37 AM) Yes, I'm aware of the 2.0.1 bugfix release, I hope to find the time for it soon, watch this space! Unfortunately there is a serious bug/regression in vlc 2.0.1 that currently prevents me from building 2.0.1. I reported the problem in the vlc bugtracker and I hope there will be a patch or an updated release from the vlc devs soon to fix this.

It looks like the VLC developers aren't interested in fixing this issue anymore therefore I'm unable to package up 2.0.1 or the upcoming 2.0.2 for EL6.

This the last reply I got:

QUOTE

Not my problem anymore then. Send a patch.

https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/6695

I'm quite disappointed by this, the VLC devs don't appear to care about keeping the build requirements stable in a maintenance branch (the 2.0 branch) which is supposed to be a maintenance/bugfix-only branch, not a place to introduce new incompatible changes (that's what the main 2.1 development tree is supposed to be for).

Edit: it looks like the vlc developers have applied a further fix for this now, maybe there is hope that the upcoming vlc 2.0.2 will build on EL6 after all!

[tux99]

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 3 2012, 10:58 AM)

Edit: it looks like the vlc developers have applied a further fix for this now, maybe there is hope that the upcoming vlc 2.0.2 will build on EL6 after all!

Quick update: the current git (development) snapshot of VLC 2.0.2 builds fine again on SL6, so as soon as 2.0.2 is released I will provide an updated VLC package in my repo.

[redman]

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 3 2012, 10:58 AM)

I'm quite disappointed by this, the VLC devs don't appear to care about keeping the build requirements stable in a maintenance branch (the 2.0 branch) which is supposed to be a maintenance/bugfix-only branch, not a place to introduce new incompatible changes (that's what the main 2.1 development tree is supposed to be for).

First of all, not everybody is as precise as you want them to be.
And secondly, many projects start as a "one-man hobby". Although projects grow and people join it, sometimes the original attitude remains the same ("hey, it's my thing, I don't care ...").
Sadly this doesn't help Linux and all the good things that come from it...

[tux99]

QUOTE (redman @ May 9 2012, 12:53 PM)

First of all, not everybody is as precise as you want them to be. And secondly, many projects start as a "one-man hobby". Although projects grow and people join it, sometimes the original attitude remains the same ("hey, it's my thing, I don't care ...").

Did you miss the subsequent posts? The problem has been solved!
(apart from that VLC isn't really a "one-man hobby" anymore, they even have a formal non-profit association for it)

[redman]

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 9 2012, 04:05 PM)

QUOTE (redman @ May 9 2012, 12:53 PM) First of all, not everybody is as precise as you want them to be. And secondly, many projects start as a "one-man hobby". Although projects grow and people join it, sometimes the original attitude remains the same ("hey, it's my thing, I don't care ..."). Did you miss the subsequent posts? The problem has been solved! (apart from that VLC isn't really a "one-man hobby" anymore, they even have a formal non-profit association for it)

I responded in a general way.
Not specific about VLC, I mentioned "many projects".

[Nux]

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 9 2012, 12:11 AM)

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 3 2012, 10:58 AM) Edit: it looks like the vlc developers have applied a further fix for this now, maybe there is hope that the upcoming vlc 2.0.2 will build on EL6 after all!  Quick update: the current git (development) snapshot of VLC 2.0.2 builds fine again on SL6, so as soon as 2.0.2 is released I will provide an updated VLC package in my repo.

Good job, Tux99!

[monsee]

Hi, people!
I tried to install VLC media-player, but fail. That is the error message (in Yumex).

QUOTE

19:00:04 : ERROR: Risoluzione dipendenze completato con errori: 19:00:04 : ERROR:  Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libmodplug.so.0()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:  Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libthreadutil.so.2()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:  Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libupnp.so.3()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:  Package: libavcodec53-0.10.2-54.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libvpx.so.1()(64bit)

I am usin CentOS 6.2 64-bit (x86_64). I had try to install VLC in my Scientific Linux 6.2 64-bit (x86_64), but fail the same (same error message).
I hope to help your efforts with my report.
Thank you for your great softwares!

[tux99]

QUOTE (monsee @ May 11 2012, 07:08 PM)

Hi, people!  I tried to install VLC media-player, but fail. That is the error message (in Yumex). I am usin CentOS 6.2 64-bit (x86_64). I had try to install VLC in my Scientific Linux 6.2 64-bit (x86_64), but fail the same (same error message). I hope to help your efforts with my report. Thank you for your great softwares!

You are trying to install the vlc package from the atrpms repo, not the one from the linuxtech repo that this thread is about. Is that intentional or where you really trying to install vlc from linuxtech but get offered by yum the one from atrpms due to having atrpms repos enabled and the higher version number?

[Nathan]

QUOTE (monsee @ May 11 2012, 06:08 PM)

Hi, people!  I tried to install VLC media-player, but fail. That is the error message (in Yumex). QUOTE 19:00:04 : ERROR: Risoluzione dipendenze completato con errori: 19:00:04 : ERROR:   Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libmodplug.so.0()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:   Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libthreadutil.so.2()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:   Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libupnp.so.3()(64bit) 19:00:04 : ERROR:   Package: libavcodec53-0.10.2-54.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)     Requires: libvpx.so.1()(64bit) I am usin CentOS 6.2 64-bit (x86_64). I had try to install VLC in my Scientific Linux 6.2 64-bit (x86_64), but fail the same (same error message). I hope to help your efforts with my report. Thank you for your great softwares!

CODE

yum --enablerepo=linuxtech install vlc

[monsee]

I tried my VLC install using Yumex (but, before, I have installed the "linuxtech repo", obviusly).
Everytime I can I prefer don't use Terminal at all.
I prefer -everytime- to use graphic interfaces and NOT command-line (any kind of command-line).
In my opinion, Terminal and command-line are matter for experienced user who love work around software because they love that software.
I love my work and I'm using my computer for my work (I am a writer and love a lot Mathematical Science). In my mind all software are mere instruments to make a final work (writing books, studying Mathematics, in my example... or editing a photo, a video, an audio-file, etc...)... So, I hope (every-time I am working using my PC) to don't have to use Terminal and command-line.

[tux99]

QUOTE (monsee @ May 12 2012, 02:09 AM)

I tried my VLC install using Yumex (but, before, I have installed the "linuxtech repo", obviusly). Everytime I can I prefer don't use Terminal at all. I prefer -everytime- to use graphic interfaces and NOT command-line (any kind of command-line). In my opinion, Terminal and command-line are matter for experienced user who love work around software because they love that software. I love my work and I'm using my computer for my work (I am a writer and love a lot Mathematical Science). In my mind all software are mere instruments to make a final work (writing books, studying Mathematics, in my example... or editing a photo, a video, an audio-file, etc...)... So, I hope (every-time I am working using my PC) to don't have to use Terminal and command-line.

Ok you need to disable, or remove the atrpms repo files since the atrpms repo clashes with the linuxtech repo with regards to vlc.

I have no experience with yumex (never heard of it before), but if yumex doesn't have any functionality for disabling repos then you need to edit the atrpms repo file in /etc/yum.repos.d/ and change all occurrences of enabled=1 to enabled=0.
After that try installing vlc again.

Be aware that if you re-enable atrpms afterwards, SL will most likely try to update the vlc package from linuxtech with the one from atrpms, so I strongly recommend not to re-enable atrpms.

Basically you need to decide if you prefer to use the atrpms or linuxtech repo, not both.

[Nathan]

It's been a long time since I used yumex, but I think there is a 'repositories' option in the left column or something. Click on that, then disable all ATrpms repos and enable the linuxtech-release one. linuxtech-testing and linuxtech-backports shouldn't be necessary.

Afterwards, just try installing VLC again and it should work.

[oldoak]

QUOTE (tux99 @ May 11 2012, 08:05 PM)

QUOTE (monsee @ May 12 2012, 02:09 AM) I tried my VLC install using Yumex (but, before, I have installed the "linuxtech repo", obviusly). Everytime I can I prefer don't use Terminal at all. I prefer -everytime- to use graphic interfaces and NOT command-line (any kind of command-line). In my opinion, Terminal and command-line are matter for experienced user who love work around software because they love that software. I love my work and I'm using my computer for my work (I am a writer and love a lot Mathematical Science). In my mind all software are mere instruments to make a final work (writing books, studying Mathematics, in my example... or editing a photo, a video, an audio-file, etc...)... So, I hope (every-time I am working using my PC) to don't have to use Terminal and command-line.  Ok you need to disable, or remove the atrpms repo files since the atrpms repo clashes with the linuxtech repo with regards to vlc. I have no experience with yumex (never heard of it before), but if yumex doesn't have any functionality for disabling repos then you need to edit the atrpms repo file in /etc/yum.repos.d/ and change all occurrences of enabled=1 to enabled=0. After that try installing vlc again. Be aware that if you re-enable atrpms afterwards, SL will most likely try to update the vlc package from linuxtech with the one from atrpms, so I strongly recommend not to re-enable atrpms. Basically you need to decide if you prefer to use the atrpms or linuxtech repo, not both.

Thank you MUCH tux99 !!!
I'm an old Fedora user who was stuck in Fedora 14 because I refused to use Gnome3.
Wanting to be "able" to upgrade, I switched to Scientific Linux and lost essentially music & video
I had read in an earlier post that EPEL would cause "irreparable" conflicts so I disabled it.
Today I read your message that atrpms would also cause conflicts, so I also disabled it.
I had sooooooo many conflicts with atrpms enabled - with it disabled, everything worked BEAUTIFULLY!

vlc is now installed and works better than ever!
I finally got mplayer to work playing streaming music - though no video yet.
I am patiently waiting and optimistic!
Again - thank you so very much tux99 !

[monsee]

I have just try to install VLC Media Player using Terminal... and fail.
The Operative System was Scientific Linux 6.2 64-bit (x86_64) XFCE-desktop environment.
I have NOT uninstalled ATrpms Repo because I need it to have my Broadband Wi-Fi Driver, of course. I cannot uninstall ATrpms repo, if I would use (today and tomorrow) my Wireless connection.
So, I (installed and enabled the LinuxTech Repo) have opened my terminal and (as root) writing:

# yum --enablerepo=linuxtech-testing install vlc

But, the answer was:

Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)
Requires: libmodplug.so.0()(64bit)
Error: Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)
Requires: libthreadutil.so.2()(64bit)
Error: Package: vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)
Requires: libupnp.so.3()(64bit)
Error: Package: libavcodec53-0.10.2-54.el6.x86_64 (atrpms)
Requires: libvpx.so.1()(64bit)
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest

So, I try to use --skip-broken and had (for the VLC package installation attempt):

Packages skipped because of dependency problems:
bitstream-vera-fonts-common-1.10-18.el6.noarch from atrpms
bitstream-vera-sans-fonts-1.10-18.el6.noarch from atrpms
bitstream-vera-sans-mono-fonts-1.10-18.el6.noarch from atrpms
bitstream-vera-serif-fonts-1.10-18.el6.noarch from atrpms
cuetools-1.4.0-0.6.svn305.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
lash-0.5.4-15.el6.x86_64 from linuxtech-release
libass-0.10.0-1.el6.x86_64 from epel
libavcodec53-0.10.2-54.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libavformat53-0.10.2-54.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libbluray1-0.2.2-2.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libcddb-1.3.2-2.el6.x86_64 from epel
libdvbpsi-0.2.2-2.el6.x86_64 from linuxtech-release
libdvdnav-4.1.4-0.1.svn1184.el6.x86_64 from epel
libebml-1.0.0-1.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libfluidsynth-1.1.5-3.el6.x86_64 from linuxtech-release
libgoom2-0-3.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libkate-0.3.8-1.el6.x86_64 from epel
libmatroska-1.0.0-1.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libprojectM-2.0.1-5.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libreplaygain-0.9.1-0.1.svn453.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
libtiger-0.3.3-3.el6.x86_64 from epel
libupnp-1.6.13-1.el6.x86_64 from epel
libvcdinfo-0.7.24-3.el6.x86_64 from linuxtech-release
libxosd2-2.2.14-4.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
live-2012.02.04-1.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
musepack-tools-sv8-3.svn435.el6.x86_64 from atrpms
vlc-2.0.1-2.el6.x86_64 from atrpms

Al last, I am not so sure to desire a media-player... if the price to pay is some conflicts against epel and atrmps Repos.
Because, if I install VLC Media Player, which way, for me, after, for future, to avoid potential conflict on epel-side and (more important, maybe, due my Wi-Fi connection) on atrpms-side?

[tux99]

QUOTE (monsee @ May 13 2012, 12:59 AM)

Al last, I am not so sure to desire a media-player... if the price to pay is some conflicts against epel and atrmps Repos. Because, if I install VLC Media Player, which way, for me, after, for future, to avoid potential conflict on epel-side and (more important, maybe, due my Wi-Fi connection) on atrpms-side?

If you can't do without having atrpms enabled, then you should disable the linuxtech repo and install vlc from atrpms. But beware that installing vlc from the atrpms repo will overwrite at least one core EL6 library (libxcb).

Also for any help with the atrpms vlc installation please open a separate thread as this thread is about the linuxtech vlc package.

[monsee]

Thank you very much, Tux!
I cannot install VLC Media Player fron ATrpms because installation fail (after disabled the LinuxTech Repo too, of course... and the same appens if I unistall the LinuxTech repo at all and using the ATrpms Repo), and that installation fail due a specific library lachs, I think (In this moment, I don' remember the library-name; late, I came here another time and write you that name).
And is not all!
Non only VLC reveal to be impossible to install; also ALL (about all) video-viewer appears to be impossible to install.
The one and only tha's installable (installation, for it, work good) is the smpeg-player from your LinuxTech Repo... But it can view the MPEG-1 files and the MP3 files, not more than these...
I am using the XFCE desktop-environment in my Scientific Linux and CentOS (both are 64-bit and both are 6.2 version) and had searching for Parole (the XFCE media-viewer), but there isn't any sign of it into Repositories...
So, for now, I must resign to have any media-player or viewer, I think...

Thank you the same. You work is a good work, in my opinion.

[tux99]

Quick update:

I have just uploaded a new version of the vlc packages to the repo, these packages contain a pre-release (git) version of VLC 2.0.2 that contains several bug-fixes. They should be at least as stable as the 2.0.0 packages as the 2.0.x branch is mostly for bug-fixes, not new features.

Also I have moved the VLC packages from the 'linuxtech-testing' to the main 'linuxtech-release' repo.

[tux99]

I'm currently working on VA-API backends, I'm happy to say that I already have the XvBA (AMD/ATI) backend working!

This means that very soon (it works already on my test box) you can smoothly play back HD quality (1080p) movies even on a low-end system (for example a netbook with a lowly AMD E350 APU) with VLC 2.0!

More details will follow once I release the packages.

[MarioTrevi]

QUOTE (tux99 @ Feb 23 2012, 08:06 PM)

VLC 2.0.2 (pre-release) RPMs for RHEL6 compatible distros are now available in the "Linuxtech release" repo. Please note these RPMS have been built on a fully up-to-date SL6.2 system with dependencies from the official SL6 repos and additional dependencies from the "Linuxtech release" repo. While dependencies from other third party repos might work to a degree, I would strongly suggest using only dependencies from the above mentioned repos as those are the ones this VLC package has been built with  and therefore will work with as intended. These VLC packages are missing only a few unimportant (at least for me!) plugins: - ProjectM (visualisation plugin) - Goom (visualisation plugin) - Sidplay (plays ancient C64 music files) - ZVBI (TV schedules) - Portaudio - GME (game music player) - TIGER () - Lirc (infrared remote control) - VLC mozilla plugin I might still add some of these plugins gradually in new releases of the VLC packages when I find time for it. These are the packages: vlc - this is the main vlc package that includes most plugins vlc-devel -  this package contains 'include' files needed to build other applications that use the vlc libraries vlc-plugin-jack - this package contains the jack-audio and the fluidsynth plugins (if you don't know what they are then you don't need them!) Please provide feedback if you test these packages! I can only improve the packages if I get feedback and bug reports. Please install the packages via YUM with the "Linuxtech release" repo enabled in order to get all the dependencies automatically, don't download and install the package manually as you would also need to do the same with all the dependencies. Quick install instructions: su - root cd /etc/yum.repos.d/ wget http://pkgrepo.linuxtech.net/el6/release/linuxtech.repo yum install vlc Here is the complete list of dependencies that will be installed from the Linuxtech 'release' repo (in addition to dependencies from the official SL6 / Centos6 / RHEL6 repos): ffmpeg-libs libSDL_image liba52 libass libbluray libcddb libcrystalhd libdca libdirac libdvbpsi libdvdnav libebml libenca libfaac libfaad2 libfribidi libkate libmad libmatroska libmodplug libmp3lame libmpeg2 libopencore-amr liborc librtmp libschroedinger libtwolame libupnp libva libvpx (replaces older libvpx from RHEL6 / Centos6 / SL6) libx264 live555 UPDATE: (15/5/2012) I have just uploaded a new version of the vlc packages to the repo, these packages contain a pre-release (git) version of VLC 2.0.2 that contains several bug-fixes. They should be at least as stable as the 2.0.0 packages as the 2.0.x branch is mostly for bug-fixes, not new features. Also I have moved the VLC packages from the 'linuxtech-testing' to the main 'linuxtech-release' repo.

I used your repo. to get vlc 2.0.1 , which is good enough. I'm on Scientific Linux 6.2 x86_64
architecture. Someone using Fedora 14 (in the past) wrote recently that they had
disabled the atrpms repo.

I'm considering doing that. Also, the same with epel (maybe).
Suppose I want to know when and for what I use the "atrpms" repo .
Is their a simple command or two to tell me what I fetched from "atrpms" ?
If all atrpms brings me is inconsistencies, I migt as well disable it.

I'm a fan of the linuxtech repos. Congratulations.

David

[Nathan]

CODE

yum list installed | grep 'atrpms'

Should work to find the ATrpms packages you installed.

Also, disabling all repos except the SL ones by default is generally a good practice, then you can enable the additional repos with the '--enablerepo=name-of-repo' flag when you need a package from name-of-repo.
I hope that made sense.