Issues playing videos in Firefox with videolan.org repository - missing libavcodec59?
Hello folks, Since a couple of months, Firefox fails to play some videos; it's not clear to me what the pattern is. Some samples that fail to play: (The topics discussed in those posts are unrelated to my problem; I just grabbed the first links I found where the issue happens) https://drewdevault.com/2022/06/20/Himitsu.html https://old.reddit.com/r/openSUSE/comments/vkleei/twnvidia_drivers_firefox_f... https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/viq6pu/oc_doit_a_todo_manager_that_y... OTOH YouTube videos play fine, and this video from drewdevault.com also plays fine: https://drewdevault.com/2022/07/01/Porting-DOOM-to-Helios.html Here is a smoking gun found when launching Firefox from a terminal; this message pops up everytime I visit a page that contains a video that does not play:
[Child 17299, MediaDecoderStateMachine #1] WARNING: Decoder=7f705ba71f00 Decode error: NS_ERROR_DOM_MEDIA_FATAL_ERR (0x806e0005) - mozilla::MediaResult mozilla::FFmpegDataDecoder<59>::InitDecoder(): Couldn't open avcodec: file /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/firefox-101.0.1/dom/media/MediaDecoderStateMachine.cpp:3587
IIUC from FFmpegDataDecoder.h, that <59> refers to the libavcodec version Firefox wants to open; that led me to observe that libavcodec59 is absent from the videolan.org repository: http://download.videolan.org/SuSE/Tumbleweed/x86_64/ As hinted in the subject, I use that repository, according to the procedures described here: https://en.opensuse.org/VLC https://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-suse.html And indeed: $ zypper search -si libavcodec Loading repository data... Reading installed packages... S | Name | Type | Version | Arch | Repository ---+------------------------+---------+-----------+--------+---------------------- i+ | libavcodec58_134 | package | 4.4.2-4.1 | x86_64 | VLC i | libavcodec58_134-32bit | package | 4.4.2-4.1 | x86_64 | VLC i | libavcodec59 | package | 5.0.1-1.7 | x86_64 | Main Repository (OSS) i | libavcodec59 | package | 5.0.1-1.7 | x86_64 | openSUSE-20210422-0 So at this stage, I have a couple of questions: (1) Is this an actual issue with the videolan.org repository, or is there no reason the absence of libavcodec59 in that repository should prevent Firefox from playing videos? (2) Should I switch over to the Packman repository? AV codecs are the only reason I am messing with repositories on my system in the first place, so I feel like the videolan.org repo is more appropriate since IIUC the Packman repo has a much broader scope…? FWIW I'm getting the impression that my issue is somewhat similar to: * this one, reported on forums.opensuse.org in April 2022: https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/568822-firefox-having-problems-wi... … where IIUC one user solved their problem by ensuring libavcodec59 is reinstalled from the Packman repository. * bug#1199210, which suggests switching to the Packman repository: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199210 Though it is noted that "you should only switch the ffmpeg packages and not everything to packman. (And set the priority of the repo lower.)", reinforcing my sentiment that ideally I'd want to stay with the videolan.org repository… Let me know if I should provide more information in order to better qualify my problem. Thanks for your time.
On 7/2/2022 7:10, Kévin Le Gouguec wrote:
Hello folks,
Since a couple of months, Firefox fails to play some videos; it's not clear to me what the pattern is. Some samples that fail to play:
CCing reply to support@ since this isn't really a good topic for factory@.
(1) Is this an actual issue with the videolan.org repository, or is there no reason the absence of libavcodec59 in that repository should prevent Firefox from playing videos?
libavcodec59 from OSS repo is doesn't include a bunch of codecs with patent issues, so I would expect it to not be able to decode everything.
(2) Should I switch over to the Packman repository? AV codecs are the only reason I am messing with repositories on my system in the first place, so I feel like the videolan.org repo is more appropriate since IIUC the Packman repo has a much broader scope…?
If you want libavcodec59 with all the codecs then it appears this is what you must do since the VLC repo doesn't offer it. BTW, this is precisely why Packman was partitioned: if you only want libavcodec etc and don't need to worry about games etc then you can just add the "Essentials" Packman repo.
Though it is noted that "you should only switch the ffmpeg packages and not everything to packman. (And set the priority of the repo lower.)", reinforcing my sentiment that ideally I'd want to stay with the videolan.org repository…
This advice is probably of the "if it isn't broken, don't fix it" variety. What you have is working besides libavcodec etc, so only change libavcodec etc and leave anything else as is. Of course you could try switching all available packages over to Packman essentials, but I'd make a note of all that was switched (or use btrfs or something) in order to undo if you experience further issues. -- Jason Craig
On 7/2/22 15:32, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Replying in the support@l.o.o mail list.
What is "support@l.o.o" and why is that yet another list that's needed? This is a straight user "How do I ...?" question that should be on the users@l.o.o list. Why not there? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
David C. Rankin composed on 2022-07-02 19:18 (UTC-0500):
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Replying in the support@l.o.o mail list.
What is "support@l.o.o" and why is that yet another list that's needed? This is a straight user "How do I ...?" question that should be on the users@l.o.o list.
Why not there?
support@ was intended for focus on support, without the general chit chat, philosophy and mega-threads that were bloating the user@ list way back when there were more subscribers than there seem to be any more. I think there was also an idea that users@ might be retired at some point. IMO, there are too many openSUSE mailing lists, and much too much fussing when someone posts in a list that someone else objects to having been sent to said list. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata
On 7/2/22 20:00, Felix Miata wrote:
Why not there? support@ was intended for focus on support, without the general chit chat, philosophy and mega-threads that were bloating the user@ list way back when there were more subscribers than there seem to be any more. I think there was also an idea that users@ might be retired at some point. IMO, there are too many openSUSE mailing lists, and much too much fussing when someone posts in a list that someone else objects to having been sent to said list.
My concern is there seems to be way to much overlap in what the various lists are supposed to do. I wouldn't want to miss the Firefox video thread if it includes any new information. The users list died quickly as soon as the lists were fragmented. I see more mega-threads here on factory than I do on users. At some point list fragmentation becomes self-defeating. This thread is a good example of what would have been proper on o@o.o that now gets posted on factory that is then answered on support? chuckling.... you just can't make this stuff up... -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 2022-07-03 05:28, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 7/2/22 20:00, Felix Miata wrote:
Why not there?
(why not users@l.o.o instead of "support@l.o.o") Because the Board decided to create support@l.o.o, with the intention that support posts would go there instead of factory@l.o.o or users@l.o.o. (You may have seen recent posts from old Board members denigrating users@l.o.o and wanting to kill it) The main idea being that support questions do not get posted on factory, and as you see, this doesn't work.
support@ was intended for focus on support, without the general chit chat, philosophy and mega-threads that were bloating the user@ list way back when there were more subscribers than there seem to be any more. I think there was also an idea that users@ might be retired at some point. IMO, there are too many openSUSE mailing lists, and much too much fussing when someone posts in a list that someone else objects to having been sent to said list.
Yes.
My concern is there seems to be way to much overlap in what the various lists are supposed to do. I wouldn't want to miss the Firefox video thread if it includes any new information. The users list died quickly as soon as the lists were fragmented. I see more mega-threads here on factory than I do on users.
And yes.
At some point list fragmentation becomes self-defeating. This thread is a good example of what would have been proper on o@o.o that now gets posted on factory that is then answered on support?
Yes, course.
chuckling.... you just can't make this stuff up...
-- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from Elesar, using openSUSE Leap 15.3)
participants (5)
-
Carlos E. R. -
David C. Rankin -
Felix Miata -
Jason Craig -
Kévin Le Gouguec