On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 07:47:26PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > On Jeu 29 décembre 2005 18:18, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 29.12.2005, 11:50 -0500 schrieb Brian Long: > >> > >> I believe there are 2 types of 3rd party repo users: > >> > >> 1) Fedora user who needs 3rd party repos for certain apps but never > >> wants that repo to override base Fedora RPMs > > > > Then use a 3rd party repo that does not override Fedora Core or Extras > > RPMS. Yes, such a repo exists, but no, I still has no mythtv -- nobody > > stepped up to package it there. Any volunteers? > > I suspect this will happen real soon after ivtv is merged in upstream > kernel and appears in Raw Hide (ivtv is currently being merged with v4l, > which will be then merged upstream) > > There's no real point in packaging mythtv cleanly when the driver most > users need is not available easily without all sorts of fugly kernel > patching. You assume that mythtv users are mostly using PVR x50 cards? I think most are doing DVB based setups (or ATSC) instead, which is in modern FC kernels. The existence or not of a driver is not very much relevant for mythtv/freevo or friends. In fact the driver <-> application model is quite orthogonal (and that is good). > I know I will donate personnaly packaging time if necessary to make it > happen. But there's no real point now, packaging mythtv is one thing, > messing with the kernel is another. I have a lot of repect for the people > that try to maintain kernel modules in FE or livna but little wish to join > them. There are rpms for ivtv since two or three years at ATrpms. BTW ATrpms even hosts the ivtv project ... -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpdgkiSFSZWC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
