On 14/07/13 07:19, Yasha Karant wrote:
> On 07/13/2013 01:14 AM, John Pilkington wrote:
>> On 13/07/13 08:15, Yasha Karant wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2013 05:38 PM, Todd And Margo Chester wrote:
>>>> On 07/12/2013 01:05 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
>>>>> The issue is that the application would not pass configure without
>>>>> disabling these options.  I have tried the various pre-built RPMs for
>>>>> vlc that have been mentioned, but all the ones that I have found have
>>>>> dependencies that cause conflicts with other versions of the same
>>>>> dependency (typically, some .so package).  Because the linux
>>>>> application
>>>>> environment is not polymorphic with encapsulation, one cannot have
>>>>> both
>>>>> versions of some such dependency installed.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Yasha,
>>>>
>>>>     It was a total pain in the butt the first few times
>>>> through.  I had to do a lot of "rpm -e xxx" and waiting
>>>> until yum would finally stop bitching.
>>>>
>>>>     I did get there eventually and haven't had a problem
>>>> since.  Stick to it and you will get there too.
>>>>
>>>> -T
>>>
>>> Hi Todd,
>>>
>>> My understanding is that your procedure can result in system instability
>>> because of the lack of polymorphism and encapsulation.  If one uses
>>> repositories other than those from SL6 or from those repositories that
>>> claim the use thereof will not introduce stock (SL6x) incompatibilities,
>>> then getting an application that requires such incompatible RPMs may
>>> cause problems.  The solution of erasing the conflicting RPM and
>>> presumably loading a replacement RPM that is not part of the stock
>>> compatible distribution can "break" other applications that are
>>> dependent upon such RPMs.
>>>
>>> Building from a SRPM probably will not solve the problem because the
>>> source RPM presumably requires the same RPMs (or SRPMs) that either do
>>> not exist for stock SL6x or conflict with stock SL6x RPMs.  Again -- are
>>> there any SL6x compatible source packages or installable RPMs that
>>> supply the functionalities that I had to disable in building the current
>>> production vlc application from source?
>>>
>>> Yasha Karant
>>>
>> I have vlc 2.0.7 installed on my SL6 i686 laptop.  It's from rpmfusion,
>> which has, I understand, stricter policies on compliance than ATrpms.  I
>> don't know what, if any, restrictions were applied in the build, and I
>> haven't tried it on many file formats, but it works well for me.  Have
>> you tried/considered it?
>>
>> Perhaps I should add that I'm also using an elrepo kernel and
>> kde-unstable.
>>
>> Here's the 64-bit version. extras, devel are there too.
>>
>> http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/el/updates/testing/6/x86_64/vlc-2.0.7-1.el6.x86_64.rpm
>>
>>
>>
>> John P
>
> I installed the rpmfusion repository, found vlc 2.0.6, and allowed the
> GUI add/remove software to proceed.  vlc 2.0.6 now is installed on my
> IA-32 laptop; when I get to the office, I will proceed with the same for
> X86-64.
>
> Are you aware if this vlc includes all needed codecs, some of which
> evidently only can be installed from EU sources?
>
> Otherwise, the rpmfusion repository seems to provide all of the needed
> dependencies.  (Note from the rpmfusion instructions:  You need to
> enable EPEL on RHEL 5 & 6 or compatible distributions like CentOS before
> you enable RPM Fusion for EL.)
>
> Thank you for the reference.
>
> Yasha Karant
>

I may be mistaken, but I think vlc uses its own codecs.  On my Fedora 17 
box there's  a folder /usr/lib64/vlc/plugins/codec/, installed from 
vlc-core.   See eg Yum-extender, Package Filelist.

I thought you wanted 2.0.7?  Note that that is in the testing repo. 
Enabling that should give a mirrorlist.

mirrorlist=http://mirrors.rpmfusion.org/mirrorlist?repo=free-fedora-updates-testing-$releasever&arch=$basearch

HTH

John P