[Ffmpeg-devel-irc] ffmpeg.log.20171126

[burek]

[00:03:25 CET] <SortaCore> why does VLC so easily vomit when it gets webm
[00:10:33 CET] <sfan5> it's VLC what did you expect
[00:11:24 CET] <iranen> VLC is often the best you can have
[00:12:07 CET] <JEEB> the thing with VLC is that releases happen so slowly that you have a long time until a lot of good stuff hits a release
[00:13:11 CET] <BtbN> a long time is an understatement by now
[00:14:23 CET] <c3r1c3-Win> LOL, that's true.
[00:14:50 CET] <SortaCore> dunno why but whole app freezes
[00:14:58 CET] <SortaCore> audio starts to loop, video stuck, UI unresponsive
[00:15:40 CET] <TheRock> guys vlc is not bad
[00:15:55 CET] <TheRock> you can play movies
[00:16:17 CET] <SortaCore> you guys know nothing about video
[01:39:25 CET] <TheRock> wow
[01:39:36 CET] <TheRock> added ffmpeg static to QT project
[01:39:40 CET] <TheRock> 16 mb size increase :s
[01:40:50 CET] <DHE> it can be shrunk by omitting things like codecs, formats, protocols and filters. I have a ~12 megabyte static link I use
[01:42:21 CET] <TheRock> yeah i will recompile and skip some not required stuff
[01:42:26 CET] <TheRock> and use upx
[01:58:23 CET] <TheRock> other than that
[01:58:29 CET] <TheRock> i have to say my ffmpeg build with qt works well
[01:58:36 CET] <TheRock> :P
[01:58:37 CET] <TheRock> even on xp
[02:02:44 CET] <TheRock> so what do i need for normal mp4,wav,avi decoding (for playing a video). can i disable dexmuxers and muxers?
[02:04:44 CET] <sfan5> for just playing you should be able to disable muxers,encoders,indevs,filters
[02:05:29 CET] <TheRock> i also disabled bsfs and protocols
[02:05:41 CET] <TheRock> is that required?
[02:05:51 CET] <sfan5> should be fine unless you need e.g. playing from http
[02:07:15 CET] <TheRock> $ configure --extra-version=QtAV --disable-doc --disable-debug --enable-static --disable-shared --enable-runtime-cpudetect --disable-postproc --toolchain=msvc --extra-ldexeflags='-SUBSYSTEM:CONSOLE,5.01' --disable-programs --disable-network --disable-nvdec --disable-indevs --disable-protocols --disable-filters --disable-bsfs --disable-muxers --disable-demuxers
[02:07:17 CET] <TheRock> i ran this
[02:07:25 CET] <TheRock> it seems to do some checks now
[02:07:37 CET] <TheRock> anything else i could disable?
[02:08:04 CET] <sfan5> disabling demuxers won't work
[02:08:15 CET] <sfan5> ffmpeg needs to know how to deconstruct e.g. avi
[02:08:24 CET] <TheRock> ok, so just --disable-muxers
[02:08:28 CET] <sfan5> yes
[02:19:41 CET] <zyme> anyone around for a possibly technical question, compilation related?
[02:20:58 CET] <sfan5> tip: just ask your question, someone will answer if they can
[02:25:29 CET] <TheRock> Enabled hwaccels:
[02:25:35 CET] <TheRock> should i let this enabled?
[02:27:08 CET] <zyme> I'm wondering if there's any special editions, mitm executable programs, or something similar to have certain options always enabled even when not cli command specified for ffmpeg, specifically I figure it would be easier to modify the command line arguments code to act the way I want regardless of what's actually typed (for certain options) so as to utilize hardware like cuda decoding and intel's accelerated hardware
[02:27:08 CET] <zyme> accelerated x264 encoding when they're not specified to be used in programs like VS or Plex -- my thought is that would be easier than trying to modify the programs themselves if I just replaced the ffmpeg.exe with a customized one.
[02:28:11 CET] <zyme> if there isn't then whats the easiest dev env to download the source, make a couple tweaks and compile it myself in windows for that purpose?
[02:30:38 CET] <TheRock> when i disable hw accelerators in ffmpeg build, it will use always software?
[02:32:07 CET] <sfan5> ffmpeg likely won't be using any hw accels by default anyway
[02:32:52 CET] <TheRock> ah, ok so then i'm going to disable them
[02:33:21 CET] <sfan5> zyme: you can problably just have a wrapper script that carefull modifies the ffmpeg args to enabled the options you want
[02:34:04 CET] <zyme> thats what I meant when I said mitm exe programs
[02:34:47 CET] <sfan5> yeah, i'm suggesting it's easiest to write one from scratch
[02:35:59 CET] <TheRock> External libraries providing hardware acceleration:
[02:35:59 CET] <TheRock> cuda			cuvid			dxva2
[02:36:14 CET] <TheRock> should i do something like --disable-dxva2?
[02:36:24 CET] <TheRock> as i don't need hw accel. anyway
[02:37:28 CET] <zyme> here is an example of one attempt to use it with defaults (showing the current VSv2 command arguments) https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/cHa35flb/VS%20v2%20ffmpeg%20syntax%20examples%202.png
[02:40:59 CET] <zyme> from what I gather it saves .ts files slowlly/laggily in my %temp% folder, and at some point converts them to x264 before streaming them out, v1 didn't follow the gpl guidelines and kept everything closed source in a single program and whatever it did was mysterious, because I don't think it used x264 I think it streamed the .ts files. which were probably buffered in ram, based off the lower cpu usage and ultra-high
[02:40:59 CET] <zyme> bandwidth-use
[02:44:25 CET] <zyme> VS-v2 ffmpeg video decoded .ts file medainfo .txt file; 8 or so of these are kept  in %temp% while its running https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/tJKIWEVb/c0000000249.ts.txt
[04:22:30 CET] <TheRock> holy cow
[04:45:32 CET] <TheRock> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27832052/how-do-i-modify-this-ffmpeg-build-script-for-minimal-binary-size-output
[04:45:43 CET] <TheRock> this seems like a small build that supports mp3 and video only
[04:46:49 CET] <SortaCore>  ./configure--disable-programs --disable-doc --disable-encoders --disable-decoders --disable-filters --disable-demuxers --disable-muxers --disable-protocols --disable-parsers --disable-hwaccels --disable-bsfs --disable-indevs --disable-outdevs --disable-swscale-alpha
[04:47:19 CET] <SortaCore> then you explicitly add --enable-thing=item1,item2
[04:47:51 CET] <SortaCore> for example, --enable-muxer=mp4,h264
[04:47:56 CET] <TheRock> Ah, ok. So --disable-everything is not good?
[04:48:07 CET] <SortaCore> that probably works too
[04:48:27 CET] <TheRock> i will give it a try
[04:48:28 CET] <SortaCore> I have this from my configure that also needs the programs, and it doesn't have --enable-program
[04:48:33 CET] <TheRock> the binary is way too big
[04:48:54 CET] <SortaCore> if it is MSVC don't forget the --toolchain=msvc
[04:49:49 CET] <TheRock> yeah thx
[04:49:55 CET] <TheRock> how much is your binary on windows?
[04:50:15 CET] <TheRock> if you disable anything except a few things needed to play videos
[04:50:57 CET] <SortaCore> atm I have that
[04:51:05 CET] <SortaCore> if you are generating ffmpeg.exe it'll probably be small
[04:51:33 CET] <SortaCore> for me, I support mp4, h264, mjpeg, and ffmpeg.exe is 5mb
[04:51:41 CET] <SortaCore> 5.5mb*
[04:51:48 CET] <TheRock> way better
[04:52:13 CET] <TheRock> right now it takes 15mb
[04:52:25 CET] <TheRock> and i just need basic stuff to decode popular media files
[04:52:31 CET] <TheRock> that my player can play it
[05:24:54 CET] <TheRock> ./configure --disable-everything --extra-version=QtAV --disable-debug --enable-static --disable-shared --enable-runtime-cpudetect --toolchain=msvc --extra-ldexeflags='-SUBSYSTEM:CONSOLE,5.01' --enable-avresample --enable-decoder=aac,h264,mjpeg,mpeg2video,mpeg4 -enable-demuxer=aac,avi,h264,image2,matroska,pcm_s16le,mov,m4v,rawvideo,wav --enable-parser=aac,h264,mjpeg,mpeg4video,mpegaudio,mpegvideo,png
[05:25:00 CET] <TheRock> did i miss anything?
[05:25:03 CET] <TheRock> it doesn't play mp4
[05:25:10 CET] <TheRock> nor wmv, etc
[05:25:26 CET] <TheRock> Decoder, parser, demuxer
[06:26:04 CET] <TheRock> protocol file was missing
[09:12:33 CET] <Aprel> Hi I'm encoding videos that have static overlays. For some videos, as much as 50% of the screen is identical from frame to frame throughout the duration of the video. Are there any settings in ffmpeg to leverage this known aspect of the video to reduce bitrate?
[09:13:40 CET] <Aprel> I'm encoding into either h.264 or h.265
[10:11:28 CET] <tyng> how do i cut audio frequencies above a certain treshold?
[10:13:53 CET] <tyng> the treble filter just do equalization
[11:08:47 CET] <durandal_1707> tyng: lowpass or highpass
[12:14:24 CET] <jinzo78> Hi! I have a question, maybe a newbie question, but I don't know where else I could post it
[12:16:03 CET] <jinzo78> I need to play a video that has one video track and multiple audio tracks. For the video track, I need to output it to a NDI "fake device", so my idea (I'm under Windows and recompiling ffmpeg is a trouble for me) is to pipe the output to VLC
[12:17:15 CET] <jinzo78> For the audio tracks, I need to output them to one output device each (I mean: Audio Track #1 to Audio Device #1, Audio Track #2 to Audio Device #2 and so on).
[12:18:13 CET] <jinzo78> This system HAS TO BE all synchronized.
[12:19:25 CET] <jinzo78> I reached a point in which I can pipe the output of one video and one audio track to VLC but I don't know how to play the other audio tracks. Maybe because I'm under Windows and the shell instruments are garbage...
[12:20:01 CET] <jinzo78> How could I do? Any advice is welcome!
[12:20:08 CET] <jinzo78> Thank you in advance :)
[18:19:33 CET] <kerio> apparently avahi pulls in CUPS
[18:19:47 CET] <kerio> and xproto
[18:19:49 CET] <kerio> and mesa-libs
[18:20:10 CET] <kerio> oh ok apparently avahi-app is what i was looking for
[18:22:03 CET] <bencoh> :D
[18:22:17 CET] <bencoh> (a bit offtopic though)
[18:22:52 CET] <kerio> hold on
[18:22:57 CET] <kerio> this isn't #freebsd
[18:23:07 CET] <kerio> how dare you have the same initial
[18:35:26 CET] <benwilber> Hello is it possible to script -filter_complex in realtime via a socket or something?  I want to ingest two rtmp streams, overlay one on top of the other, and output a new rtmp stream, but I would like to be able to control the positioning of the PIP overlay in realtime without having to restart the stream to make filter changes
[18:51:36 CET] <furq> benwilber: sendcmd or zmq
[18:57:39 CET] <TheRock> ./configure --disable-everything --extra-version=QtAV --disable-debug --enable-static --disable-shared --enable-runtime-cpudetect --toolchain=msvc --extra-ldexeflags='-SUBSYSTEM:CONSOLE,5.01' --enable-avresample --enable-decoder=aac,h264,mjpeg,mpeg2video,mpeg4 --enable-demuxer=aac,avi,h264,image2,matroska,pcm_s16le,mov,m4v,rawvideo,wav --enable-parser=aac,h264,mjpeg,mpeg4video,mpegaudio,mpegvideo,png
[18:57:40 CET] <TheRock> --disable-programs --enable-protocol=file
[18:57:54 CET] <TheRock> did i miss something? Videos are played well, but mp3 do not work
[18:58:07 CET] <JEEB> you don't have the decoder enabled :P
[18:58:18 CET] <TheRock> aac isn't mp3?
[18:58:20 CET] <JEEB> no?
[18:58:25 CET] <TheRock> oh
[18:58:26 CET] <JEEB> AAC is MPEG-4 Part... something
[18:58:38 CET] <JEEB> MP3 is MPEG-1 Layer 3
[18:58:55 CET] <TheRock> what would i need to add in demuxer, parser and decoder?
[18:59:07 CET] <JEEB> mp3 most likely :P
[18:59:55 CET] <TheRock> :) ok
[19:00:19 CET] <JEEB> I would recommend taking the output of a configure line without all your random options and taking a note of that
[19:00:26 CET] <JEEB> since it will output everything it enables by default
[19:01:09 CET] <TheRock> yeah, I have that log somewhere
[19:01:41 CET] <TheRock> if you look at my config regarding the video files
[19:01:57 CET] <TheRock> mp4, .wmv, .avi, .webm, .flv, can be played?
[19:02:03 CET] <TheRock> or did i miss anything?
[19:02:19 CET] <TheRock> i'd like to support all most used video extensions
[19:02:39 CET] <TheRock> right now i just tested mp4, it worked good
[19:03:41 CET] <JEEB> well there's no flv demuxxer enabled, and the webm one is part of matroska but might be a separate thing, maybe. also ASF (wmv) is missing
[19:03:59 CET] <sfan5> wmv will also need the wmv* and wma* codecs
[19:04:22 CET] <JEEB> also for video you're missing vp8, vp9 which are used for webm and wmv* and vc1, yes
[19:04:49 CET] <JEEB> for audio vorbis, opus and wma* for webm and ASF
[19:06:26 CET] <TheRock> ok
[19:06:35 CET] <TheRock> flv is just "flv" in demuxer?
[19:06:41 CET] <TheRock> that webm, wmv thing is clear
[19:06:49 CET] <JEEB> yes
[19:08:02 CET] <TheRock> the lib i'm using recommends --enable-runtime-cpudetect
[19:08:18 CET] <TheRock> would you recommend this too? what is the benefit?
[19:08:55 CET] <sfan5> that's enabled by default, you don't need that flag
[19:09:52 CET] <JEEB> yes, it makes sense to have around and you shouldn't have to enable it since it's enabled by default
[19:10:13 CET] <TheRock> ok, even if --disable-everything is specified?
[19:10:16 CET] <JEEB> yes
[19:10:31 CET] <JEEB> disable-everything disables all features but not how the framework is built
[19:10:41 CET] <JEEB> meh, I put it in a bad way
[19:11:02 CET] <JEEB> in any case, it just means that the internal configuration of that framework (even if it doesn't contain anything) isn't changed :P
[19:11:17 CET] <JEEB> in other words, it just disables things in the framework, not the framework itself
[19:11:54 CET] <TheRock> yeah understood
[19:15:00 CET] <debianuser> Hello. Trying to debug pl0t's issue. Summary: `ffmpeg -f lavfi -i "aevalsrc='mod(t,.01)*20*mod(t,-.5)+mod(t,.5)*mod(t,2)/2'" -f alsa default` works and produces sound, but `ffplay -nodisp -f lavfi "aevalsrc='mod(t,.01)*20*mod(t,-.5)+mod(t,.5)*mod(t,2)/2'"` freezes: https://pastebin.com/EL1MyjSQ What's the difference between ffplay and ffmpeg playing to alsa? Any ideas welcome!
[19:15:05 CET] <debianuser> (you can ignore the aevalsrc=... part, it's just a way to produce some test sound out of ffmpeg/ffplay)
[20:15:26 CET] <jcdutton> I am trying to use the segment muxer, so I have capture from a web cam, and store the files in 10 minute chunks.  The HLS muxer lets you create date directories, but the segment one appears not to
[20:15:39 CET] <jcdutton> Is there a patch for it somewhere?  Or shall I write one?
[22:27:44 CET] <SortaCore> hmm I need someone to explain the libx264 license to me
[22:27:57 CET] <SortaCore> I'm using it to create a DLL, which other people will use to create EXEs
[22:28:15 CET] <SortaCore> does that mean both my DLL and their EXEs are then required to be open-source?
[22:28:48 CET] <SortaCore> does making libx264 a separate DLL remove that restriction and I only need provide the libx264 source?
[22:29:12 CET] <BtbN> iirc x264 is GPL
[22:29:14 CET] <BtbN> and not LGPL
[22:29:40 CET] <BtbN> So there is no exception, even if it's a shared library.
[22:31:12 CET] <JEEB> x264 is either GPL or you get a license from x264 LLC
[22:31:30 CET] <JEEB> so if you don't want to share your source code and use x264, then the latter is the only alternative
[22:32:06 CET] <SortaCore> well, my source code I don't particularly mind about
[22:32:19 CET] <SortaCore> it's just the guys who are using it for EXEs might want closed-source EXEs
[22:32:35 CET] <SortaCore> so best way forward is to have two versions of my DLL?
[22:32:45 CET] <SortaCore> (or contact x264 LLC?)
[22:32:58 CET] <JEEB> well yes, if you pick the GPL route then your thing is as well under GPL, which makes the things using your library also GPL
[22:33:28 CET] <TheRock> i heard the h264 company provides up to a certain amount of users/subscribers no fees
[22:33:39 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: that's separate from SOFTWARE licensing
[22:33:47 CET] <JEEB> you have the patent/licensing mess separate
[22:33:54 CET] <JEEB> let's keep this to software licensing, OK?
[22:34:19 CET] <TheRock> i see, ok
[22:34:27 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: also it's not a "H.264 company" but MPEG-LA, which is the completely-separate-from MPEG licensing pool thing
[22:34:48 CET] <JEEB> H.264 is under MPEG-LA for licensing, and yes you can read their PDFs about it
[22:35:04 CET] <TheRock> i see
[22:35:24 CET] <JEEB> their licensing stuff is relatively sane, which is why with HEVC some companies decided they weren't getting enough cash and now we have like three or four patent licensing pools :P
[22:35:35 CET] <JEEB> (for HEVC)
[22:35:50 CET] <JEEB> SortaCore: but yes, licensing x264 commercially is another alternative
[22:36:01 CET] <TheRock> JEEB: for playing videos (only decoding) to which companies do i have to contact
[22:36:16 CET] <TheRock> when it's closed source/commerical
[22:37:03 CET] <JEEB> IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), but it basically depends :P generally for H.264 it's MPEG-LA and for AAC it's some other place (fraunhofer or technicolor?) for example
[22:37:14 CET] <JEEB> whether you're required or not depends on your juristiction and other things
[22:37:52 CET] <TheRock> yeah i will look into it
[22:37:59 CET] <TheRock> but i could also provide *.obj, i guess
[22:38:32 CET] <JEEB> well, I'm not sure that always decides anything
[22:38:43 CET] <JEEB> for you to understand it you will have to read through MPEG-LA's licensing terms
[22:38:48 CET] <JEEB> what you have to license and for what
[22:39:15 CET] <TheRock> yeah, i see. but afaik decoding is lpgl and encoding gpl, right?
[22:39:27 CET] <TheRock> because i don't need to --enable-gpl and it works
[22:39:34 CET] <JEEB> that's not format licensing
[22:39:44 CET] <JEEB> that's software licensing, in which case yes - the FFmpeg AVC decoder is LGPL
[22:40:02 CET] <JEEB> x264 can be utilized for encoding, which is a GPL project
[22:40:20 CET] <TheRock> so i guess i'd need to license the software at MPEG LA/AAC
[22:40:22 CET] <SortaCore> well, my EXE buyers are on the poor side of things, so I'm not sure x264 LLC will be that interested
[22:40:45 CET] <JEEB> SortaCore: they usually cater the licensing per client
[22:41:05 CET] <SortaCore> can't hurt to ask (looks for contact details)
[22:42:13 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: and you have to look up for how each format is licensed. For example, this is the thing for AVC (the general terms http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/avcweb.pdf )
[22:42:39 CET] <JEEB> but as I said, this is completely separate from any software licensing
[22:44:07 CET] <JEEB> SortaCore: it's much less good for compression ratios and features but there's also openh264 from cisco which is under 2-clause simplified if you just need /some/ H.264 encoding https://github.com/cisco/openh264/blob/master/LICENSE
[22:45:09 CET] <TheRock> JEEB: so let's say I'm selling an app that does only h264 decoding. In page 8 it says no royality up to 100k.
[22:45:29 CET] <TheRock> when i got it settled with the MPEG LA, is there any other licensing required by h264 company or anyone else?
[22:45:47 CET] <JEEB> officially not that I know, MPEG-LA was supposed to be the one-stop shop.
[22:45:47 CET] <TheRock> i didn't get it
[22:46:01 CET] <TheRock> ok.
[22:46:03 CET] <JEEB> but this is, once again, completely different from software licensing
[22:46:08 CET] <JEEB> just remember that
[22:46:26 CET] <TheRock> so, software licensing is handled different at MPEG LA?
[22:46:34 CET] <TheRock> that's the part i don't get
[22:46:35 CET] <JEEB> it's unrelated to MPEG-LA
[22:46:48 CET] <JEEB> you follow the software licensing of the OSS projects you use
[22:46:50 CET] <JEEB> that's the first checkbox
[22:47:03 CET] <TheRock> ah, i get it now.
[22:47:26 CET] <TheRock> so when i use ffmpeg. I have to follow lpgl for decoding
[22:47:28 CET] <JEEB> and then you follow the patent licensing mess if required (IANAL so talk to a lawyer if you really care)
[22:47:37 CET] <TheRock> and additionally get a contract with mpeg la
[22:47:41 CET] <TheRock> did you mean like that?
[22:47:44 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: no, you need to follow LGPL for LGPL features (aka, you don't use --enable-gpl)
[22:47:56 CET] <JEEB> as soon as you use --enable-gpl you go into GPL territory
[22:48:04 CET] <JEEB> or otherwise utilize OSS software that is under the GPL
[22:48:08 CET] <TheRock> yeah whatever license is used by the foreign source
[22:48:22 CET] <JEEB> ok
[22:48:36 CET] <TheRock> and additionally to that a contract with mpeg la
[22:48:36 CET] <JEEB> but yes, basically keep with the software licensing first (it's the simpler one)
[22:48:47 CET] <JEEB> and then you might have to deal with the patent licensing mess
[22:49:29 CET] <TheRock> but does ffmpeg not require a license then too as they provide h264 stuff?
[22:49:33 CET] <TheRock> when that's two different things
[22:49:49 CET] <JEEB> FFmpeg is not officially producing any binaries
[22:49:51 CET] <furq> ffmpeg doesn't provide binaries
[22:49:53 CET] <JEEB> or distributing them
[22:49:58 CET] <furq> it links to some other people's binaries
[22:49:59 CET] <JEEB> which is what most patent licensing pools care about
[22:50:10 CET] <TheRock> ok, got it :P
[22:50:36 CET] <furq> those people may or may not have licenses, idk, but they're not making any money so it's unlikely the licensors care to go after them
[22:50:51 CET] <SortaCore> there's a screen capture software I know that runs ffmpeg.exe in the background
[22:50:54 CET] <furq> plus i'm pretty sure the two main guys distributing binaries are in the EU where software patents don't exist
[22:50:55 CET] <SortaCore> paid for
[22:51:10 CET] <TheRock> well, i'm in EU too
[22:51:13 CET] <furq> basically unless americans are buying your product you're probably safe from mpeg-la and friends
[22:51:24 CET] <TheRock> in EU the fines are not high usually
[22:51:27 CET] <TheRock> but USA = millions
[22:51:51 CET] <furq> you don't need a license for anything intra-EU because software patents aren't recognised in the EU
[22:52:19 CET] <TheRock> so their USA patent is not world wide, unlike for trademarks (company names)?
[22:52:23 CET] <furq> i am extremely not a lawyer though
[22:52:25 CET] <JEEB> uhh, if I was you I'd stick a big IANAL there, and IIRC it was much more murky per-country
[22:52:29 CET] <furq> ^
[22:52:59 CET] <JEEB> there definitely are people distributing binaries from France etc
[22:53:13 CET] <JEEB> (videolan f.ex.)
[22:53:15 CET] <JEEB> but those are thought to have done their own research
[22:53:28 CET] <furq> also, to be very clear: patent license, not software license
[22:53:32 CET] <furq> you're still bound by the (l)gpl
[22:53:37 CET] <TheRock> yeah
[22:54:17 CET] <JEEB> yea, it's two different worlds - and the software licensing one is generally a much more simple thing :P
[22:54:28 CET] <JEEB> following GPL or LGPL or BSD is generally simple
[22:54:56 CET] <furq> if you're inside the free usage tier for the patent licenses, which you probably do, then you should get one regardless
[22:55:07 CET] <furq> otherwise you'll need someone qualified to tell you if you actually need one
[22:55:21 CET] <furq> i suspect you don't, but who the fuck am i
[22:57:54 CET] <TheRock> i prefer BSD license
[22:58:29 CET] <JEEB> well different licenses convey different thoughts of the developer(s)
[22:59:32 CET] <JEEB> also do remember that the older versions and v3 of (L)GPL are quite different. mostly in the "you can't use DRM" part, which came out after tivo did their thing which FSF didn't like
[23:01:11 CET] <TheRock> LPGL is not bad, though
[23:01:24 CET] <TheRock> afaik, it's enough to provide the .obj files so relinking is possible
[23:01:32 CET] <TheRock> whereas with GPL you need to provide the full src
[23:01:47 CET] <JEEB> yes, object files and code for the LGPL thing
[23:02:05 CET] <JEEB> or just the code for the LGPL thing if it's a dynamically linked thing
[23:02:27 CET] <JEEB> which is why a lot of people use shared libraries with LGPL
[23:02:49 CET] <furq> isc for life
[23:02:50 CET] <JEEB> with GPL, yes. if you base on GPL software your software must also be available under the GPL
[23:03:06 CET] <JEEB> furq: ISC is nice and simple, but I do see the fact that people like to limit things somewhat
[23:03:13 CET] <JEEB> esp. with libraries and LGPL
[23:03:23 CET] <furq> yeah lgpl is fine
[23:03:40 CET] <furq> i'm not one of these people who gets extremely angry about it online
[23:04:12 CET] <JEEB> there's usually a reason why something is GPL or LGPL, and generally those that seem to have some commercial prospects let you license the (A)GPL thing with a more corporate-oriented license
[23:04:28 CET] <furq> i might get a bit mad about the agpl
[23:04:43 CET] <furq> but that's pretty normal i think
[23:04:47 CET] <JEEB> the AGPL is very strict, yes. which is why I just often don't look at things that are AGPL
[23:04:59 CET] <JEEB> but generally those projects have an alternative licensing scheme
[23:05:05 CET] <TheRock> if you use LPGL, is it actually enough to provide the src/obj files on github or do they need to come together with the binary/installer
[23:05:09 CET] <furq> is there anything notable that uses the agpl
[23:05:18 CET] <furq> i assume anything agpl just doesn't get used because nobody wants to touch it
[23:05:35 CET] <JEEB> I think some media serving stuff used it but also had a big big separate licensing thing
[23:05:48 CET] <JEEB> so you could see how something worked but definitely not put it into production
[23:05:50 CET] <furq> TheRock: you're supposed to provide the source in the same place as the binaries
[23:06:00 CET] <furq> if you host the binaries on github then having the source on github is fine
[23:06:14 CET] <SortaCore> ok sent them a message
[23:06:36 CET] <furq> you basically want it to be impossible to be able to download the binaries but not the source
[23:06:39 CET] <furq> because then you're in breach
[23:06:45 CET] <JEEB> SortaCore: cool, hope that goes through well :) if not, there's alternatives like openh264
[23:07:05 CET] <TheRock> I see. I wanted to release the source and use a single static binary
[23:07:07 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: technically the license says IIRC that the person can request the source code after 3 years or so, which is why I tend to just put the sources together with the code
[23:07:08 CET] <SortaCore> well, the priciest DLL in the niche market I'm sending to is $10
[23:07:20 CET] <SortaCore> so they're not going to make a mint off my customers :p
[23:07:28 CET] <TheRock> my plan was to provide a link to the src
[23:07:31 CET] <TheRock> inside the app
[23:07:37 CET] <furq> you don't need to ship the source with the binary
[23:07:38 CET] <TheRock> but i guess that isn't possible
[23:07:42 CET] <JEEB> yes, that's also really good. I'm just generally paranoid
[23:08:07 CET] <furq> but if you have a download page on your site then that needs to link to a copy of the exact lgpl source you used
[23:08:19 CET] <TheRock> yeah
[23:08:21 CET] <furq> i.e. the exact release/commit
[23:08:34 CET] <furq> and if you just link to github.com/ffmpeg then if github goes down then you're in breach
[23:08:34 CET] <TheRock> so a link to github fo example is fine?
[23:08:37 CET] <furq> it's up to you how likely you think that is
[23:08:49 CET] <TheRock> yeah a link to my src/commit
[23:08:52 CET] <TheRock> not the ffmpeg rep
[23:08:58 CET] <SortaCore> *cough* my pi died
[23:09:05 CET] <SortaCore> it was probably rebooted while it was still booting up
[23:09:28 CET] <TheRock> when i provide the SRC *upon request*
[23:09:29 CET] <furq> i mean you can do that but i would just host a tarball on the download server my binaries are on
[23:09:33 CET] <TheRock> is that enough too?
[23:09:36 CET] <furq> it's hardly any extra effort
[23:09:39 CET] <SortaCore> yea, I would keep a copy of the source
[23:09:49 CET] <SortaCore> then have "if GitHub is down, please contact the author for a copy"
[23:09:57 CET] <SortaCore> that gives you some margin on time, as well
[23:10:01 CET] <furq> when i've made binaries in the past i just added a step to my build system that created the source tarballs
[23:10:37 CET] <SortaCore> hmmm
[23:10:51 CET] <furq> linking to github is "probably going to be fine" but it's hardly any extra effort to definitely be fine forever
[23:11:22 CET] <TheRock> and how about if you provide the src only upon request (i. e. you write in the info section of your app a notice)?
[23:11:33 CET] <furq> i never bothered reading that far into the lgpl tbh
[23:11:42 CET] <JEEB> TheRock: technically valid
[23:12:13 CET] <JEEB> so technically you could require someone to actually request the source code from you
[23:12:23 CET] <JEEB> which is valid for X years mentioned in the license
[23:12:36 CET] <furq> tbh that actually seems like more effort to me
[23:12:40 CET] <JEEB> yes
[23:12:43 CET] <SortaCore> actually my client is using this DLL in programs that run on a screen-less device
[23:12:45 CET] <JEEB> also you're much more likely to forget
[23:12:57 CET] <SortaCore> so... GPL still even though user can't see anything?
[23:13:03 CET] <furq> imagine you don't update the project for 18 months, delete your cloned ffmpeg repo
[23:13:05 CET] <SortaCore> or even wire up a computer to it to dev on it?
[23:13:06 CET] <furq> then you get a request
[23:13:14 CET] <furq> now you've got to figure out exactly what commit you used to build the binaries
[23:14:04 CET] <JEEB> SortaCore: is that regarding the requirements in GPL to show the license or something? I'm pretty sure it had provisions
[23:14:30 CET] <JEEB> because I'm pretty sure there are embedded boxes with linux on it that don't have screens or anything
[23:15:48 CET] <sfan5> >see long discussion in #ffmpeg
[23:15:52 CET] <sfan5> >it's about licensing
[23:15:55 CET] <sfan5> 🤔
[23:16:02 CET] <JEEB> lol
[23:18:30 CET] <furq> hell yeah
[23:57:35 CET] <SortaCore> yea JEEB
[23:57:49 CET] <SortaCore> so if it's linux-box there's a section?
[00:00:00 CET] --- Mon Nov 27 2017