[opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support

Ignacio Areta

23 Nov 2013 23 Nov '13

02:22

Oh sorry, you understood (and I too). So, let's redo the story. (= This is a little strange. Recently, you changed the package to add protobuf dependency. This is a major change, isn't it? In the last year, you moved Chromium to Packman because of FFMpeg. At that time, Chromium was shipped without FFMpeg. Some days after doing this, you moved these packages back to openSUSE after discovering a method to compile Chromium's FFMpeg only with free codecs support. Then was born the chromium-ffmpegsumo package. Support to the the proprietary codecs weren't in openSUSE's package beacause as we know, these formats has issues with patents in some countries. Right? People, now this isn't working properly, because chromium-ffmpegsumo is reproducing MP3/MP4. The chromium.spec has these two lines: -Dproprietary_codecs=1 -Dffmpeg_branding=Chrome According to the Chromium's wiki ( www.chromium.org/audio-video ) the use of these 2 build flags activates the support for the proprietary formats. I think the way to fix this is changing these values to 0 and Chromium, respectively. Any other idea? Regards, Ignacio PS: Raymond, I forgot to subscribing to the list, so I can't reply your email directly. PS2: sorry for the 6th paragraph in the comment 1 of the bug. I used the wrong words.

...

Thanks for making me look stupid and that I do not understand the issue. The reason why I asked you to write to this mailinglist was your statement that Chromium should be build without the proprietary-codec and branding=chrome options. This would mean that Chromium no longer would support H.264, MP4, etc codecs that normally are supported by Chrome. As that this is a major change, I asked you to validate this on this mailinglist. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Show replies by date

Raymond Wooninck

23 Nov 23 Nov

08:33

On Saturday 23 November 2013 00:22:46 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...

Oh sorry, you understood (and I too). So, let's redo the story. (=

I really start liking (NOT) the tone of these messages you are creating.

...

This is a little strange. Recently, you changed the package to add protobuf dependency. This is a major change, isn't it? In the last year, you moved Chromium to Packman because of FFMpeg. At that time, Chromium was shipped without FFMpeg. Some days after doing this, you moved these packages back to openSUSE after discovering a method to compile Chromium's FFMpeg only with free codecs support. Then was born the chromium-ffmpegsumo package. Support to the the proprietary codecs weren't in openSUSE's package beacause as we know, these formats has issues with patents in some countries. Right?

To correct the story, I would like to state the following: The concerned flags have ALWAYS been part of the Chromium package. From the very beginning when Chromium wasn't even part of the official distribution. We were always able to build Chromium based on a patched tarball that even had the ffmpeg source tree removed. If you look at the bug reports for the Chromium project itself, you might see quite some bugs reported around this methodology that they are using. At a certain moment the builds started to fail as that more Chromium code started to depend on ffmpeg and that the libffmpegsomo had to be present for Chromium to work. As that libffmpegsumo is build from the ffmpeg sources, I saw no alternative than to move the package to Packman, as that my understanding was that I was not even allowed to put the ffmpeg sources on OBS. This appeared wrong and with the help of Ludwig Nussel and the SuSE legal team we managed to get Chromium back in to official distribution as that the ffmpeg sources itself are fine. This move however did not change any of the buildflags used. Recently I got help from the Gentoo packager and Chromium contributor to start building Chromium based on official released tarballs and at this moment openSUSE is one of the very few distributions that builds all three channels (Stable, Beta and Dev). Only Stable is in the official distributions. Again this did not change anything regarding to the build flags.

...

People, now this isn't working properly, because chromium-ffmpegsumo is reproducing MP3/MP4. The chromium.spec has these two lines: -Dproprietary_codecs=1 -Dffmpeg_branding=Chrome

As indicated these buildflags have been part from the first Chromium package (around 2009/2010) !!

...

According to the Chromium's wiki ( www.chromium.org/audio-video ) the use of these 2 build flags activates the support for the proprietary formats.

And they were added from the beginning to increase the experience of the Chromium browser and to prevent all kind of bug reports that Chromium doesn't support x, y,, z

...

I think the way to fix this is changing these values to 0 and Chromium, respectively. Any other idea?

As indicated if I remove these buildflags, then Chromium will no longer support any of these formats regardless whether the ffmpeg package from Packman is used. Regards Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ignacio Areta

18:32

Sorry,I forgot to include the Factory ML. Sending again. ----------------> To correct the story, I would like to state the following:

...

The concerned flags have ALWAYS been part of the Chromium package. From the very beginning when Chromium wasn't even part of the official distribution. We were always able to build Chromium based on a patched tarball that even had the ffmpeg source tree removed. If you look at the bug reports for the Chromium project itself, you might see quite some bugs reported around this methodology that they are using.

At a certain moment the builds started to fail as that more Chromium code started to depend on ffmpeg and that the libffmpegsomo had to be present for Chromium to work. As that libffmpegsumo is build from the ffmpeg sources, I saw no alternative than to move the package to Packman, as that my understanding was that I was not even allowed to put the ffmpeg sources on OBS. This appeared wrong and with the help of Ludwig Nussel and the SuSE legal team we managed to get Chromium back in to official distribution as that the ffmpeg sources itself are fine. This move however did not change any of the buildflags used.

OK, with these flags you generate the chromium-ffmpeg package and move it to Packman. But what about the chromium-ffmpegsumo? Isn't it generated from the Chromium's source? If yes, what build flag are you using? Regards, Ignacio ----------------------------------------

...

From: tittiatcoke@gmail.com To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org CC: ignacioareta@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 09:33:12 +0100

On Saturday 23 November 2013 00:22:46 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...
Oh sorry, you understood (and I too). So, let's redo the story. (=

I really start liking (NOT) the tone of these messages you are creating.

...
This is a little strange. Recently, you changed the package to add protobuf dependency. This is a major change, isn't it? In the last year, you moved Chromium to Packman because of FFMpeg. At that time, Chromium was shipped without FFMpeg. Some days after doing this, you moved these packages back to openSUSE after discovering a method to compile Chromium's FFMpeg only with free codecs support. Then was born the chromium-ffmpegsumo package. Support to the the proprietary codecs weren't in openSUSE's package beacause as we know, these formats has issues with patents in some countries. Right?

To correct the story, I would like to state the following:

The concerned flags have ALWAYS been part of the Chromium package. From the very beginning when Chromium wasn't even part of the official distribution. We were always able to build Chromium based on a patched tarball that even had the ffmpeg source tree removed. If you look at the bug reports for the Chromium project itself, you might see quite some bugs reported around this methodology that they are using.

At a certain moment the builds started to fail as that more Chromium code started to depend on ffmpeg and that the libffmpegsomo had to be present for Chromium to work. As that libffmpegsumo is build from the ffmpeg sources, I saw no alternative than to move the package to Packman, as that my understanding was that I was not even allowed to put the ffmpeg sources on OBS. This appeared wrong and with the help of Ludwig Nussel and the SuSE legal team we managed to get Chromium back in to official distribution as that the ffmpeg sources itself are fine. This move however did not change any of the buildflags used.

Recently I got help from the Gentoo packager and Chromium contributor to start building Chromium based on official released tarballs and at this moment openSUSE is one of the very few distributions that builds all three channels (Stable, Beta and Dev). Only Stable is in the official distributions. Again this did not change anything regarding to the build flags.

...
People, now this isn't working properly, because chromium-ffmpegsumo is reproducing MP3/MP4. The chromium.spec has these two lines: -Dproprietary_codecs=1 -Dffmpeg_branding=Chrome

As indicated these buildflags have been part from the first Chromium package (around 2009/2010) !!

...
According to the Chromium's wiki ( www.chromium.org/audio-video ) the use of these 2 build flags activates the support for the proprietary formats.

And they were added from the beginning to increase the experience of the Chromium browser and to prevent all kind of bug reports that Chromium doesn't support x, y,, z

...
I think the way to fix this is changing these values to 0 and Chromium, respectively. Any other idea?

As indicated if I remove these buildflags, then Chromium will no longer support any of these formats regardless whether the ffmpeg package from Packman is used.

Regards

Raymond ------------------------ From: tittiatcoke@gmail.com To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org CC: ignacioareta@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 09:33:12 +0100

On Saturday 23 November 2013 00:22:46 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...
Oh sorry, you understood (and I too). So, let's redo the story. (=

I really start liking (NOT) the tone of these messages you are creating.

...
This is a little strange. Recently, you changed the package to add protobuf dependency. This is a major change, isn't it? In the last year, you moved Chromium to Packman because of FFMpeg. At that time, Chromium was shipped without FFMpeg. Some days after doing this, you moved these packages back to openSUSE after discovering a method to compile Chromium's FFMpeg only with free codecs support. Then was born the chromium-ffmpegsumo package. Support to the the proprietary codecs weren't in openSUSE's package beacause as we know, these formats has issues with patents in some countries. Right?

To correct the story, I would like to state the following:

The concerned flags have ALWAYS been part of the Chromium package. From the very beginning when Chromium wasn't even part of the official distribution. We were always able to build Chromium based on a patched tarball that even had the ffmpeg source tree removed. If you look at the bug reports for the Chromium project itself, you might see quite some bugs reported around this methodology that they are using.

At a certain moment the builds started to fail as that more Chromium code started to depend on ffmpeg and that the libffmpegsomo had to be present for Chromium to work. As that libffmpegsumo is build from the ffmpeg sources, I saw no alternative than to move the package to Packman, as that my understanding was that I was not even allowed to put the ffmpeg sources on OBS. This appeared wrong and with the help of Ludwig Nussel and the SuSE legal team we managed to get Chromium back in to official distribution as that the ffmpeg sources itself are fine. This move however did not change any of the buildflags used.

Recently I got help from the Gentoo packager and Chromium contributor to start building Chromium based on official released tarballs and at this moment openSUSE is one of the very few distributions that builds all three channels (Stable, Beta and Dev). Only Stable is in the official distributions. Again this did not change anything regarding to the build flags.

...
People, now this isn't working properly, because chromium-ffmpegsumo is reproducing MP3/MP4. The chromium.spec has these two lines: -Dproprietary_codecs=1 -Dffmpeg_branding=Chrome

As indicated these buildflags have been part from the first Chromium package (around 2009/2010) !!

...
According to the Chromium's wiki ( www.chromium.org/audio-video ) the use of these 2 build flags activates the support for the proprietary formats.

And they were added from the beginning to increase the experience of the Chromium browser and to prevent all kind of bug reports that Chromium doesn't support x, y,, z

...
I think the way to fix this is changing these values to 0 and Chromium, respectively. Any other idea?

As indicated if I remove these buildflags, then Chromium will no longer support any of these formats regardless whether the ffmpeg package from Packman is used.

Regards

Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

22:20

On Saturday 23 November 2013 16:32:21 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...

OK, with these flags you generate the chromium-ffmpeg package and move it to Packman. But what about the chromium-ffmpegsumo? Isn't it generated from the Chromium's source? If yes, what build flag are you using?

Just to do you a favor, I build chromium-dev in your proposed way. This directly had as a consequence that the proprietary codecs are no longer supported, regardless if you build the ffmpeg package on packman with this flag activated. I already expected this and I also indicated this also in the bug report, that if we drop those flags from the main chromium build, the support for those codecs would be gone. That was actually the reason why I wanted you to raise this issue on the Factory mailinglist to get the consensus with a wider audience. As already indicated, if you don't want to have any proprietary codecs on your system, then I guess you better stick to Opera and/or FireFox. The only way that Chromium will change the build-flags is either based on the indication from a majority that this is what they want or the indication from the SuSE legal team that these codecs are indeed not allowed to be build on the openSUSE OBS. And so far, I have neither one. Regards Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger

22:27

On Sat, 2013-11-23 at 14:20 -0800, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

As already indicated, if you don't want to have any proprietary codecs on your system, then I guess you better stick to Opera and/or FireFox. The only way that Chromium will change the build-flags is either based on the indication from a majority that this is what they want or the indication from the SuSE legal team that these codecs are indeed not allowed to be build on the openSUSE OBS.

Raymond, I think it's rather a question if we as openSUSE are allowed to distribute those codecs in binary form. So far, it was always clearly stated that 'NO' (legal loosened up on the 'source' in the tarballs, but never on the binary parts). Except for MP3 Fluendo, where a special agreement exists (and fluendo pays the patent fee IIUC, in hope to get more users to buy the full codec pack). So, with my limited knowledge on the topic at hand, I'd advise you to seek assistance from the legal team. Cheers, Dominique -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ignacio Areta

27 Nov 27 Nov

04:07

----------------------------------------

...

From: tittiatcoke@gmail.com To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org CC: ignacioareta@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 14:20:01 -0800

On Saturday 23 November 2013 16:32:21 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...
OK, with these flags you generate the chromium-ffmpeg package and move it to Packman. But what about the chromium-ffmpegsumo? Isn't it generated from the Chromium's source? If yes, what build flag are you using?

Just to do you a favor, I build chromium-dev in your proposed way. This directly had as a consequence that the proprietary codecs are no longer supported, regardless if you build the ffmpeg package on packman with this flag activated.

Removed in revision 26 (I didn't test it), back in revision 28. build.opensuse.org/package/rdiff/network:chromium/chromium-dev?linkrev=base&rev=26 build.opensuse.org/package/rdiff/network:chromium/chromium-dev?linkrev=base&rev=28

...

As already indicated, if you don't want to have any proprietary codecs on your system, then I guess you better stick to Opera and/or FireFox. The only way that Chromium will change the build-flags is either based on the indication from a majority that this is what they want or the indication from the SuSE legal team that these codecs are indeed not allowed to be build on the openSUSE OBS.

Personally I don't have any problem with the proprietary formats support in Chromium (altough I don't like them). But I'm concerning because the things aren't working as expected, the browser should play these formats only when the chromium-ffmpeg from Packman is installed. Regards Ignacio -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

09:35

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 02:07:14 Ignacio Areta wrote:

...

Removed in revision 26 (I didn't test it), back in revision 28. build.opensuse.org/package/rdiff/network:chromium/chromium-dev?linkrev=base& rev=26 build.opensuse.org/package/rdiff/network:chromium/chromium-dev?linkrev=base &rev=28

I had some strange behavior with Chromium and wanted to test if it was caused by remove the build flag.s

...

Personally I don't have any problem with the proprietary formats support in Chromium (altough I don't like them). But I'm concerning because the things aren't working as expected, the browser should play these formats only when the chromium-ffmpeg from Packman is installed.

As indicated, they won't. By removing those flags, those codecs will no longer be supported. Not even if the ffmpeg package from Packman is installed. I have tested it with the change for the Chromium-dev package and that was the result. They are lost forever. As you noticed Ciaran (legal), came back and indicated that they should be removed. So all packages will be changed and the codecs will no longer be supported. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

C

09:48

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

...
Personally I don't have any problem with the proprietary formats support in Chromium (altough I don't like them). But I'm concerning because the things aren't working as expected, the browser should play these formats only when the chromium-ffmpeg from Packman is installed.

As indicated, they won't. By removing those flags, those codecs will no longer be supported. Not even if the ffmpeg package from Packman is installed. I have tested it with the change for the Chromium-dev package and that was the result. They are lost forever.

As you noticed Ciaran (legal), came back and indicated that they should be removed. So all packages will be changed and the codecs will no longer be supported.

While I completely understand the reasoning behind making this change.... speaking as an end user of Chromium... "Aaaargh!" With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user. I know it's a Catch-22 (a real can't win situation), but... C. -- openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Alin Marin Elena

09:55

for vlc there is a reasoning as you need it for the kde backend iirc plus is easily pluginable when you add the packman. i think the legal team shall take over the build of chromium in obs and Raymond if wants to continue to build shall do it in packman. Is not a good idea to have a featureless browser. regards, Alin Without Questions there are no Answers! ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Alin Marin ELENA http://alin.elenaworld.net/ ______________________________________________________________________ Without Questions there are no Answers! ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Alin Marin ELENA http://alin.elenaworld.net/ ______________________________________________________________________ On 27 November 2013 09:48, C wrote:

...

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...
...
Personally I don't have any problem with the proprietary formats support in Chromium (altough I don't like them). But I'm concerning because the things aren't working as expected, the browser should play these formats only when the chromium-ffmpeg from Packman is installed.

As indicated, they won't. By removing those flags, those codecs will no longer be supported. Not even if the ffmpeg package from Packman is installed. I have tested it with the change for the Chromium-dev package and that was the result. They are lost forever.

As you noticed Ciaran (legal), came back and indicated that they should be removed. So all packages will be changed and the codecs will no longer be supported.

While I completely understand the reasoning behind making this change.... speaking as an end user of Chromium... "Aaaargh!"

With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

I know it's a Catch-22 (a real can't win situation), but...

C. -- openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

10:21

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:48:31 C wrote:

...

With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

It is not that there is no longer any codec support. The codecs here are regarding MP4 and H.264. Those will no longer be supported. Other codecs should still be supported. It seems that without those two codecs, html5 starts using webm as the supported codec. We have to see which codecs we actually really loose and which ones are still there. The end situation will be the following: As of this writing (May 5, 2011), Chromium supports standard the following: Vorbis audio codec Theora video codec VP8 video codec PCM 8-bit unsigned integer PCM 16-bit signed integer little endian PCM 32-bit float little endian Ogg container format WebM container format WAV container format When building with the proprietary codec flag, there would also be support for MP3 audio codec AAC audio codec (Main only, not AAC-LC, AAC-SSR, HE-AAC) H.264 video codec MP4 container format Regards Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Alin Marin Elena

10:33

Hi Raymond, correct me if I am wrong... the lack of the proprietary support... renders for example the youtube experience indeterministic? I do not remember that all the content is webm available... I suspect other content rich websites would be affected too. and this is some experience we shall avoid to give the users. The solution would be probably for user to uninstall his/her chromium and install one from packman. I do not remmber if you managed to get it to have installed multiple versions of the moment. Personally I am totally against offer a capon version of chromium... Too much duplicated work on the the packaging side... probably poor experience on the user side. regards, Alin Without Questions there are no Answers! ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Alin Marin ELENA http://alin.elenaworld.net/ ______________________________________________________________________ On 27 November 2013 10:21, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:48:31 C wrote:

...
With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

It is not that there is no longer any codec support. The codecs here are regarding MP4 and H.264. Those will no longer be supported. Other codecs should still be supported.

It seems that without those two codecs, html5 starts using webm as the supported codec. We have to see which codecs we actually really loose and which ones are still there. The end situation will be the following:

As of this writing (May 5, 2011), Chromium supports standard the following: Vorbis audio codec Theora video codec VP8 video codec PCM 8-bit unsigned integer PCM 16-bit signed integer little endian PCM 32-bit float little endian Ogg container format WebM container format WAV container format

When building with the proprietary codec flag, there would also be support for MP3 audio codec AAC audio codec (Main only, not AAC-LC, AAC-SSR, HE-AAC) H.264 video codec MP4 container format

Regards

Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

10:42

Hi Alin, On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:33:59 Alin Marin Elena wrote:

...

correct me if I am wrong... the lack of the proprietary support... renders for example the youtube experience indeterministic? I do not remember that all the content is webm available... I suspect other content rich websites would be affected too.

I don't know the answer here. I guess that time will tell what can still be done with Chromium or not. Unfortunately Chromium is no longer that modular that we could build just the media stuff on Packman to enrich the experience.

...

and this is some experience we shall avoid to give the users. The solution would be probably for user to uninstall his/her chromium and install one from packman. I do not remmber if you managed to get it to have installed multiple versions of the moment.

There is nothing from Packman to install. Packman only builds the ffmpeg library. If these codecs are indeed forming a problem, then the only solution would indeed be to drop Chromium from openSUSE distro and start building it completely on Packman. Regards Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

C

10:49

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:48:31 C wrote:

...
With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

It is not that there is no longer any codec support. The codecs here are regarding MP4 and H.264. Those will no longer be supported. Other codecs should still be supported.

Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264? http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr... I can't pretend to understand the whole legal silliness behind it all, but... shouldn't "we" be able to use H.264?

...

It seems that without those two codecs, html5 starts using webm as the supported codec. We have to see which codecs we actually really loose and which ones are still there. The end situation will be the following:

As of this writing (May 5, 2011), Chromium supports standard the following: Vorbis audio codec Theora video codec VP8 video codec PCM 8-bit unsigned integer PCM 16-bit signed integer little endian PCM 32-bit float little endian Ogg container format WebM container format WAV container format

Which is a list of formats that are almost (not not quite) completely not used on the broader web. It would be nice to say, use only OGG for audio and so on, but... in the real world, people are not doing that. The not quite is particularly interesting for the webm format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebM#Services

...

When building with the proprietary codec flag, there would also be support for MP3 audio codec AAC audio codec (Main only, not AAC-LC, AAC-SSR, HE-AAC) H.264 video codec MP4 container format

Which are the actual codecs users are very likely interested in (even if they don't know what they are called)... and the codecs that cannot be included because of legal requirements. We're back to the Catch-22 :-) Can we at least still plug-in PepperFlash with this new Chromium build with less codecs? (I have a feeling I'll be switching to the Chrome supplied by Google in the near future :-P ) C. -- openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar

10:58

Quoting C :

...

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...
On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:48:31 C wrote:

...
With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

It is not that there is no longer any codec support. The codecs here are regarding MP4 and H.264. Those will no longer be supported. Other codecs should still be supported.

Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264? http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr...

I can't pretend to understand the whole legal silliness behind it all, but... shouldn't "we" be able to use H.264?

If you ensure the patent fee is paid, you can... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

C

11:13

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

...

Quoting C :

...
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...
On Wednesday 27 November 2013 10:48:31 C wrote:

...
With no codec support... what's the point of building Chromium? This is like building VLC with no codec support. It's nice and all but not really practical for the actual end user.

It is not that there is no longer any codec support. The codecs here are regarding MP4 and H.264. Those will no longer be supported. Other codecs should still be supported.

Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264?

http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr...

I can't pretend to understand the whole legal silliness behind it all, but... shouldn't "we" be able to use H.264?

If you ensure the patent fee is paid, you can... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing

The patent fee is paid as was stated by Cisco: "We plan to open-source our H.264 codec, and to provide it as a binary module that can be downloaded for free from the Internet. Cisco will not pass on our MPEG LA licensing costs for this module, and based on the current licensing environment, this will effectively make H.264 free for use in WebRTC." How that can be implemented... or even if it can be... no idea, but according to the statement from Cisco, the fees are paid on H.264 and it's available for anyone to use. C. -- openSUSE 12.3 x86_64, KDE 4.11 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Wolfgang Rosenauer

11:33

Am 27.11.2013 12:13, schrieb C:

...

...
If you ensure the patent fee is paid, you can... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing

The patent fee is paid as was stated by Cisco:

"We plan to open-source our H.264 codec, and to provide it as a binary module that can be downloaded for free from the Internet. Cisco will not pass on our MPEG LA licensing costs for this module, and based on the current licensing environment, this will effectively make H.264 free for use in WebRTC."

How that can be implemented... or even if it can be... no idea, but according to the statement from Cisco, the fees are paid on H.264 and it's available for anyone to use.

We need to wait until something is finally available at all. Up to now this is a press announcement only AFAIK. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Dominique Leuenberger

12:09

Quoting C :

...

...
...
Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264?

http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr...

I can't pretend to understand the whole legal silliness behind it all, but... shouldn't "we" be able to use H.264?

If you ensure the patent fee is paid, you can... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing

The patent fee is paid as was stated by Cisco:

"We plan to open-source our H.264 codec, and to provide it as a binary module that can be downloaded for free from the Internet. Cisco will not pass on our MPEG LA licensing costs for this module, and based on the current licensing environment, this will effectively make H.264 free for use in WebRTC."

Chromium is not a binary module that is downloaded from cisco... it's source code.. and not covered by Cisco. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

11:34

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 11:49:49 C wrote:

...

Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264? http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr tc

Reading this article, then this is not applicable for Chromium. As stated, Cisco will provide a binary. Chromium however has it's own code to provide support for the H.264 codec, so my assumption here is that this does not fall under the Cisco arrangement.

...

Can we at least still plug-in PepperFlash with this new Chromium build with less codecs?

This has no effect whatsoever on PepperFlash which is provided through Packman. Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Andrew Wafaa

11:47

On 27 November 2013 11:34, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 11:49:49 C wrote:

...
Whatever happened with the whole thing of Cisco and H.264? http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webr tc

Reading this article, then this is not applicable for Chromium. As stated, Cisco will provide a binary. Chromium however has it's own code to provide support for the H.264 codec, so my assumption here is that this does not fall under the Cisco arrangement.

...
Can we at least still plug-in PepperFlash with this new Chromium build with less codecs?

This has no effect whatsoever on PepperFlash which is provided through Packman.

Hi Raymond. Rather than perpetuate the discussion as IANAL, I recommend sending this over to Ciaran Farrell as he is indeed a lawyer (one of SUSE's fine legal team). Let him advise what can and can't be done from a legal perspective. Regards, Andy -- Andrew Wafaa IRC: FunkyPenguin GPG: 0x3A36312F -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

11:50

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 11:47:46 Andrew Wafaa wrote:

...

Rather than perpetuate the discussion as IANAL, I recommend sending this over to Ciaran Farrell as he is indeed a lawyer (one of SUSE's fine legal team). Let him advise what can and can't be done from a legal perspective.

Hi Andy, The original bug report was assigned to Ciaran and he came back that we can not build those codecs. So I guess that's it. Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Andrew Wafaa

12:12

On 27 November 2013 11:50, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 11:47:46 Andrew Wafaa wrote:

...
Rather than perpetuate the discussion as IANAL, I recommend sending this over to Ciaran Farrell as he is indeed a lawyer (one of SUSE's fine legal team). Let him advise what can and can't be done from a legal perspective.

Hi Andy,

The original bug report was assigned to Ciaran and he came back that we can not build those codecs.

So I guess that's it.

Unfortunately that does seem to be the case then, either work around the codecs - which you have already cautioned against; or remove it completely from OBS and build it in Packman. It's a shame that those are the options, but we have to play the cards we are dealt :( -- Andrew Wafaa IRC: FunkyPenguin GPG: 0x3A36312F -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Cristian Morales Vega

12:40

On 27 November 2013 12:12, Andrew Wafaa wrote:

...

On 27 November 2013 11:50, Raymond Wooninck wrote:

...
On Wednesday 27 November 2013 11:47:46 Andrew Wafaa wrote:

...
Rather than perpetuate the discussion as IANAL, I recommend sending this over to Ciaran Farrell as he is indeed a lawyer (one of SUSE's fine legal team). Let him advise what can and can't be done from a legal perspective.

Hi Andy,

The original bug report was assigned to Ciaran and he came back that we can not build those codecs.

So I guess that's it.

Unfortunately that does seem to be the case then, either work around the codecs - which you have already cautioned against; or remove it completely from OBS and build it in Packman. It's a shame that those are the options, but we have to play the cards we are dealt :(

I replied in the bug report. AFAIS: Chromium just includes an internal copy of ffmpeg. This copy has the same restrictions than the normal/system one. Nothing to see here, really. The Chromium package in 12.3:Update and 13.1 compiles this copy with H.264 support, this needs to be fixed. If you want H264 support you just need to do the same than with the normal/system library: Substitute the internal copy for a version from Packman (or just delete it and it will use the system version). The only thing to consider is that it doesn't make sense to include a copy of ffmpeg only inside Chromium (in %{libdir}/chromium/). If we are going to include a copy of ffmpeg better to include a system/global one and let Chromium (and every other package) use it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Raymond Wooninck

13:38

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 12:40:27 Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

I replied in the bug report. AFAIS:

And as I replied back in the same bugreport

...

Chromium just includes an internal copy of ffmpeg. This copy has the same restrictions than the normal/system one. Nothing to see here, really.

Correct, but the H.264 and MP4 support is not being delivered with ffmpeg.

...

The Chromium package in 12.3:Update and 13.1 compiles this copy with H.264 support, this needs to be fixed. If you want H264 support you just need to do the same than with the normal/system library: Substitute the internal copy for a version from Packman (or just delete it and it will use the system version).

Which wouldn't help much as indicated. Deleting the ffmpegsumo library now from the chromium renders the browser completely useless unless you have Adobe Flash installed. Without Flash support, every video from youtube is indicated that you would need Adobe Flash or a HTML5 supporting browser. Restoring the ffmpegsumo, allows chromium to play the HTML5 content from youtube. I have ffmpeg, libavcodec, etc installed from Packman, so Chromium should fall back as you indicated. My feeling is however that Chromium has to be build with the system ffmpeg libraries in order to provide this fall back, which brings us to the point if OBS will ever have a ffmpeg library that is sufficient to get packages compiled.

...

The only thing to consider is that it doesn't make sense to include a copy of ffmpeg only inside Chromium (in %{libdir}/chromium/). If we are going to include a copy of ffmpeg better to include a system/global one and let Chromium (and every other package) use it.

Well, Chromium unfortunately contains a lot of copies of libraries that should actually be system libraries, but it does. A lot of people/distro's have complained, but this is the way that Google is handling it. Given all the comments, etc, I am starting to feel more and more for removing Chromium from the openSUSE OBS and to start it building on Packman. This would resolve a lot of issues and I can then combine things into a single package. Also I don't have to worry about any future changes that Google has in mind. Raymond -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Wolfgang Rosenauer

14:38

Am 27.11.2013 14:38, schrieb Raymond Wooninck:

...

Which wouldn't help much as indicated. Deleting the ffmpegsumo library now from the chromium renders the browser completely useless unless you have Adobe Flash installed. Without Flash support, every video from youtube is indicated that you would need Adobe Flash or a HTML5 supporting browser. Restoring the ffmpegsumo, allows chromium to play the HTML5 content from youtube. I have ffmpeg, libavcodec, etc installed from Packman, so Chromium should fall back as you indicated. My feeling is however that Chromium has to be build with the system ffmpeg libraries in order to provide this fall back, which brings us to the point if OBS will ever have a ffmpeg library that is sufficient to get packages compiled.

GStreamer is designed the way that you don't care in your software which decoder sinks are available during runtime. You always use the GStreamer API. That's why Firefox just works for MP3 and H264 once the corresponding gstreamer modules are installed on a system. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ignacio Areta

1 Dec 1 Dec

23:49

----------------------------------------

...

Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:38:22 +0100 From: wolfgang@rosenauer.org To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support

GStreamer is designed the way that you don't care in your software which decoder sinks are available during runtime. You always use the GStreamer API.

That's why Firefox just works for MP3 and H264 once the corresponding gstreamer modules are installed on a system.

Yeah, but in these cases you are higly depend of the development of these projects. Just an example: GStreamer and Firefox don't support VP9 yet, while Chromium supports it already. But the use of GStreamer can have its advantages: you can get hardware decode for videos, which Chromium doesn't support in Linux yet. Ignacio -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Wolfgang Rosenauer

2 Dec 2 Dec

06:54

Am 02.12.2013 00:49, schrieb Ignacio Areta:

...

----------------------------------------

...
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:38:22 +0100 From: wolfgang@rosenauer.org To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support

GStreamer is designed the way that you don't care in your software which decoder sinks are available during runtime. You always use the GStreamer API.

That's why Firefox just works for MP3 and H264 once the corresponding gstreamer modules are installed on a system.

Yeah, but in these cases you are higly depend of the development of these projects. Just an example: GStreamer and Firefox don't support VP9 yet, while Chromium supports it already.

But the use of GStreamer can have its advantages: you can get hardware decode for videos, which Chromium doesn't support in Linux yet.

I don't know what the strategy for VP9 is from Mozilla. VP8/WebM/Theora/OGG is all by default used from the internal code and not from GStreamer. GStreamer support is even filtered to H.264 and MP3 in Firefox currently. The "open" stuff is built into Firefox directly. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Robert Kaiser

12:30

Wolfgang Rosenauer schrieb:

...

I don't know what the strategy for VP9 is from Mozilla.

Once VP9 will be somewhat stable and useful to actually use in videos, it will be supported in Firefox, but right now VP9 is still under heavy development by Google. I guess Mozilla will pick it up with some libvpx update in the future. As a note, meanwhile Mozilla and Xiph keep working on the next generation of codecs after VP9/H.265, see the Daala project. ;-) Robert Kaiser -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Robert Kaiser

3 Dec 3 Dec

20:26

Robert Kaiser schrieb:

...

Wolfgang Rosenauer schrieb:

...
I don't know what the strategy for VP9 is from Mozilla.

Once VP9 will be somewhat stable and useful to actually use in videos, it will be supported in Firefox, but right now VP9 is still under heavy development by Google. I guess Mozilla will pick it up with some libvpx update in the future.

And from what I just saw, Mozilla is actually working on getting that support pulled in sooner than I expected. :) You can follow https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=vp9 and its dependencies to see progress in getting VP9 support added. Robert Kaiser -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ignacio Areta

1 Dec 1 Dec

23:37

Just complementing... ----------------------------------------

...

From: tittiatcoke@gmail.com To: opensuse-factory@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] RE: [Bug 847971] Chromium from openSUSE has MP3/MP4 support Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:38:29 +0100

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 12:40:27 Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...
I replied in the bug report. AFAIS:

And as I replied back in the same bugreport

...
Chromium just includes an internal copy of ffmpeg. This copy has the same restrictions than the normal/system one. Nothing to see here, really.

Correct, but the H.264 and MP4 support is not being delivered with ffmpeg.

...
The Chromium package in 12.3:Update and 13.1 compiles this copy with H.264 support, this needs to be fixed. If you want H264 support you just need to do the same than with the normal/system library: Substitute the internal copy for a version from Packman (or just delete it and it will use the system version).

Which wouldn't help much as indicated. Deleting the ffmpegsumo library now from the chromium renders the browser completely useless unless you have Adobe Flash installed. Without Flash support, every video from youtube is indicated that you would need Adobe Flash or a HTML5 supporting browser. Restoring the ffmpegsumo, allows chromium to play the HTML5 content from youtube. I have ffmpeg, libavcodec, etc installed from Packman, so Chromium should fall back as you indicated. My feeling is however that Chromium has to be build with the system ffmpeg libraries in order to provide this fall back, which brings us to the point if OBS will ever have a ffmpeg library that is sufficient to get packages compiled.

Worst than this. ffmpegsumo is used for any multimedia resource, not just YouTube. Chromium without ffmpegsumo library can crash in any page which use multimedia resources.

...

...
The only thing to consider is that it doesn't make sense to include a copy of ffmpeg only inside Chromium (in %{libdir}/chromium/). If we are going to include a copy of ffmpeg better to include a system/global one and let Chromium (and every other package) use it.

Well, Chromium unfortunately contains a lot of copies of libraries that should actually be system libraries, but it does. A lot of people/distro's have complained, but this is the way that Google is handling it.

Do Chromium developers do this because using system libraries in all situations is very hard? Supporting a lot of different versions of these libraries is terrible. APIs and ABIs changes (this includes ffmpeg too). And sometimes distro-specific bug reports appears at upstream because the use of system libraries (eg: libxml). Also, Chromium in 12.2 is using bundled libraries (from chromium.spec, line 22). %define chromium_system_libs 0%{?suse_version}> 1220 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

3799

Age (days ago)

3809

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

28 comments

12 participants

participants (12)

Alin Marin Elena
Andrew Wafaa
C
Cristian Morales Vega
Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger
Dominique Leuenberger
Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar
Ignacio Areta
Ignacio Areta
Raymond Wooninck
Robert Kaiser
Wolfgang Rosenauer