Comment 27 for bug 312898

Chris Carlin <email address hidden> writes:

> Ekiga doesn't use libavcodec directly, so just having libavcodec-
> unstripped around isn't enough.
>

In ubuntu, we do not want ANY applications to be built against the
*unstripped* variants of libavcodec as a saftey guard. If users want to
do that at home, fine, but we actually cannot do that in ubuntu because
that introduces just even more confusion as we already have in this bug.

First: Please have a look and understand what actually is stripped. The
stripping process just removes some encoder av_register_codec
calls. I cannot see how this modification can possibly affect
applications building against libavcodec. If you have such an example,
please show me.

This means: Building against the regular libavcodec-dev package and then
replacing libavcodec-unstripped-52 should produce exactly the same
result as linking against an "unstripped" libavcodec-dev package. The
latter btw does not exist since it would be byte-identical to the
stripped version.

> Instead, Ekiga's codecs are distributed as plugins built by libopal,
> which has to be built against the unstripped-dev package.

With the rationale above, I can assure you that the 2nd statement "has
to be built against the unstripped-dev package" is plain wrong.

I'm currently considering adding an alternate dependency on the -dev
packages because of popular request. "Provides" is the wrong solution
since it breaks versioned dependencies. But I'm still unsure if people
here are just misguided because of rumor or misinformation. I still have
not seen a single case where this chance is absolutely necessary beside
from the convenience of not having to install the unstripped package
over.

--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4