[Mageia-dev] rehashing the faac issue

[PhilippeDidier]

Guillaume Rousse a écrit :
> Hello list.
> 
> The case of faac package has been discussed several times already:
> https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1730
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mageia-dev@mageia.org/msg08059.html
> 
> https://www.mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/2012-June/016673.html
> 
> So far, the conclusion was than we had no perfect solution to handle the
> case of a software being having both licensing and patents issue,
> whereas usually software only suffer from one of these problems only,
> and than creating a dedicated 4th repository was unreasonable. Hence the
> removal of the package from the mirrors (but not from our svn...).
> 
> Given the importance of this package for several multimedia-related
> software (it is a mandatory dependency for cinerella, for instance), I
> think it's time to revisit this decision, and rather look for a
> pragmatic solution rather than a merely bureaucratic one. So far, I
> didn't see anything in the line of "we don't want to distribute it",
> rather "we don't know how to do it"...
> 
> For me, the simplest solution is just to decide between non-free and
> tainted repository where this piece of code fits better (or sucks less),
> eventually document the exception somewhere on the wiki, and stop
> getting blocked eternally by our own rules...

Look at the closed bugs containing the word faac... there are other
programs than cinerella

Anyway Blogdrake repo proposes a faac rpm ...
If we need a Third Party Repo we could ask them to provide rpms built
with faac (the spec files are ready for this)
look at bug 2833 to get the list of rpms that may be built with faac