Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 138

Thread: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    190

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    As a nervous user, I am wondering what the effect would be on other packages when installing mplayer, using the package method described in this excellent thread.

    I am on Intrepid 8.1

    What would happen if Ubuntu released new mplayer package(s)? Do they replace the ones installed by this guide, or are they automatically blocked somehow? If they are blocked, won't this stop the upgrade of other dependent packages? (e.g I use the firefox mplayer plug-in - which mplayer will it use?)

    I have managed to compile mplayer (and ffpmeg) inside my home directory and manually substituted the built binaries (mplayer, ffmpeg, ffplay, ffstream) into /usr/bin. This seems to work, but I wonder what the effect is of not also substituting the new .so libraries into /usr/lib.

    I guess I can replace the binaries (and libs) in /usr/bin (and /usr/lib) by building using the configure option --prefix=/usr and using "sudo make install" I thought this would cause the least interference with the Ubuntu package system, as no package is changed. But could this break other apps that rely on using older libs? (say OpenMovieEditor?) Clearly if I did this, the changes would be undone by an official package upgrade, but then I could decide if the upgrade was worth keeping. If not, it's simply another "sudo make install" to overwrite the package upgrade.

    So, is it safe to build mplayer & ffmpeg using the non-package way (sudo make install) - will it cause problems for other installed apps, and will firefox mplayer plug-in get to work with the new mplayer?

    If I use the package method, what are the issues with that?

    Golly, so many questions ...

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    6,934

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Hi ticket,

    Quote Originally Posted by ticket View Post
    As a nervous user, I am wondering what the effect would be on other packages when installing mplayer, using the package method described in this excellent thread.
    For the most part I have attempted to bring the installation close to the Ubuntu package management system although a closer approach to this would be the creation of a Debian package, but I am not such a great fan of Debian packages so I suspect this will not happen . Some have reported problems with MEncoder in particular but I believe there is no such problem with MPlayer itself. The x264 issue is a bit of a pain though...


    What would happen if Ubuntu released new mplayer package(s)? Do they replace the ones installed by this guide, or are they automatically blocked somehow? If they are blocked, won't this stop the upgrade of other dependent packages? (e.g I use the firefox mplayer plug-in - which mplayer will it use?)
    With the naming convention that I have used a new Ubuntu version of MPlayer would not register as a new version on your system. However I believe that Ubuntu / Debian are very unlikely to release a new version in the near future and the subversion MPlayer will always be more modern than any repository version.


    I have managed to compile mplayer (and ffpmeg) inside my home directory and manually substituted the built binaries (mplayer, ffmpeg, ffplay, ffstream) into /usr/bin. This seems to work, but I wonder what the effect is of not also substituting the new .so libraries into /usr/lib.

    I guess I can replace the binaries (and libs) in /usr/bin (and /usr/lib) by building using the configure option --prefix=/usr and using "sudo make install" I thought this would cause the least interference with the Ubuntu package system, as no package is changed. But could this break other apps that rely on using older libs? (say OpenMovieEditor?) Clearly if I did this, the changes would be undone by an official package upgrade, but then I could decide if the upgrade was worth keeping. If not, it's simply another "sudo make install" to overwrite the package upgrade.
    Quite frankly most of these ideas sound like too much work to me . I suspect you would be best to either allow an installation to /usr/local and experiment a little to see if other software is happy with this.

    So, is it safe to build mplayer & ffmpeg using the non-package way (sudo make install) - will it cause problems for other installed apps, and will firefox mplayer plug-in get to work with the new mplayer?

    If I use the package method, what are the issues with that?
    I believe that it is always better to integrate with the package management system. If you are a little concerned I would recommend you try the proper Debian package of MPlayer put together by RVM and this would integrate more tightly with the rest of your system.

    Hope this helps?

    Andrew
    You think that's air you're breathing now?

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    190

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Thanks Andrew!

    With the naming convention that I have used a new Ubuntu version of MPlayer would not register as a new version on your system.
    To clarify, what would happen if Ubuntu did a release? Would the release not appear at all in Synaptic? If it did appear, what would stop it overwriting an installation?

    I believe that it is always better to integrate with the package management system.
    I tend to agree, but maybe the slowness in the Ubuntu package updates is just to ensure that it doesn't break any other installed apps?

    I'm still learning here, so is it the case that a proper deb package would install binaries and .so's and that removing it would restore the bins and .so's that were overwritten?

    If so, that is an important difference between an install via

    "./configure --prefix=/usr ..." and
    "./configure --prefix=/usr/local ..." (the default)

    So using --prefix=/usr, I assume I would not be able to sensibly undo the install. I presume a "make clean" would simply delete the binaries and .so's, requiring the user to reinstall the relevant packages. Have I understood this right?

    The reason for my caution is I once tried installing a deb package from the Avenard repo (for latest nVidia drivers) but when trying to remove it, it messed up a few items (mplayer went, for example). I was able to recover, though, by re-doing some installs.

    On another subject, I recall reading on one of these forums that someone managed to get smooth replay of 1280 x 720 h264 video on a 1.3GHz machine. That's really impressive - I have a 1.5GHz dell with a PCI 6200 but at that resolution, although I get a smooth playback, it is in s-l-o-w motion - so the sound quickly goes out of sync. This was using a fresh mplayer build (but I didn't do a build of the x264). Wish I knew how that poster managed to get that performance.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    6,934

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Hi ticket,

    Quote Originally Posted by ticket View Post
    To clarify, what would happen if Ubuntu did a release? Would the release not appear at all in Synaptic? If it did appear, what would stop it overwriting an installation?
    If Ubuntu did a release I suspect that the naming system used would still allow the svn MPlayer installed by this guide to be seen as a 'newer' version. In this guide this is seen in the checkinstall syntax '--pkgversion "3:1.0~svn-......'. If the Ubuntu devs changed the naming cnvention radically there is a possibility that the svn MPlayer package rom this guide would be overwritten. But it is my self-appointed role to keep an eye out for this sort of event .

    [..] maybe the slowness in the Ubuntu package updates is just to ensure that it doesn't break any other installed apps?
    In general yes but MPlayer is a special case, hence this guide. MPlayer release versions are few and far between, the last official version was released in 2007 and this is the one served up to Ubuntu users. There are moves afoot at MPlayer to release another version soon (rc3) but there is no guarantee that Karmic Koala will pick this up in time and certainly no guarantee that backports will make it to Intrepid.

    I'm still learning here, so is it the case that a proper deb package would install binaries and .so's and that removing it would restore the bins and .so's that were overwritten?

    If so, that is an important difference between an install via

    "./configure --prefix=/usr ..." and
    "./configure --prefix=/usr/local ..." (the default)
    Unfortunately I am not entirely clear on that one as my knowledge of real debian packages is more than a little limited.

    ...I presume a "make clean" would simply delete the binaries and .so's, requiring the user to reinstall the relevant packages. Have I understood this right?
    Not quite, 'make clean' simple cleans up some aspects of the source code tree itself and has no effect on actual 'installation'. You do not use the following logical step in the chain which is 'sudo make install'? I noted this before when you described manually placing files after compilation. MPlayer has the ability to run 'sudo make uninstall' from the source code tree if you decide not to use checkinstall / deb.

    The reason for my caution is I once tried installing a deb package from the Avenard repo (for latest nVidia drivers) but when trying to remove it, it messed up a few items (mplayer went, for example). I was able to recover, though, by re-doing some installs.
    I understand your caution completely .


    On another subject, I recall reading on one of these forums that someone managed to get smooth replay of 1280 x 720 h264 video on a 1.3GHz machine. That's really impressive - I have a 1.5GHz dell with a PCI 6200 but at that resolution, although I get a smooth playback, it is in s-l-o-w motion - so the sound quickly goes out of sync. This was using a fresh mplayer build (but I didn't do a build of the x264). Wish I knew how that poster managed to get that performance.
    You do not need to build x264 if you only wish to playback h264 videos as FFmpeg has native decoders, x264 allows encoding with MEncoder. I suspect that when I write a guide for Karmic and the svn MPLayer x264 compilation + Mencoder will not feature at all. Playback of h264 in this way sounds like a version of MPLayer with vdpau capabilities and a decent NVidia card. I do not cover this in my guide but there are others that do:

    HOWTO: Nvidia Driver + VDPAU + Smplayer +Mplayer
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1037625

    All the best,

    Andrew
    You think that's air you're breathing now?

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Beans
    13,059

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    I'm still learning here, so is it the case that a proper deb package would install binaries and .so's and that removing it would restore the bins and .so's that were overwritten?
    Maybe this can clear that up a bit for you.
    While there is absolutely no great reason to do so I almost always build mplayer as a 'proper' debian package set. (mplayer, mencoder, docs

    If I wanted to install a new. higher versioned deb than I'd just click on it and the package manager would install it. (over current

    If I wanted to use a lesser versioned deb than I'd have to remove the current mplayer package first, (thru synaptic or apt-get), then install the older .deb

    Removing a package does only that - remove, it doesn't 'restore' the previous one or a repo one from your sources.

    Whether you install to /usr or /usr/local doesn't make much difference, you should though avoid having the same app installed to both. ( I'm 99% sure that /usr/local takes preference over /usr, so while it's possible to have installs of same app in both, seems like poor practice

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    190

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Quote Originally Posted by mc4man View Post
    Whether you install to /usr or /usr/local doesn't make much difference, you should though avoid having the same app installed to both. ( I'm 99% sure that /usr/local takes preference over /usr, so while it's possible to have installs of same app in both, seems like poor practice
    I think there must be some difference. In my installation, /usr/lib is crammed with stuff, whereas /usr/local/lib is nearly empty (it has just got the frei0r video effects plug-ins).

    Seems official packages install into /usr/lib and /usr/bin, while manually built packages are usually configured to install into /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/bin. Currently, my /usr/local/bin is empty.

    So if people compile and make install using /usr/local, does that install a binary into /usr/local/bin?

    Presumably /usr/local/bin is in the search path for running binaries, so is /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin searched first?

    Apologies if all this simply amounts to a re-statement of what you posted!

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Beans
    548

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    /usr/local/bin always has higher priority. I tend to compile a lot of stuff on my ubuntu systems that isn't available in the repo or very old or buggy versions are in the repos. You don't have to make deb packages or worry about uninstalling the repo version. Just configure and install stuff into /usr/local and you're good. If you question where an executable is being run from just do a "which xxxx" and it will give you the path to the executable. Ubuntu's package manager can continue updating the repo version of a package to it's heart's content, it won't touch your /usr/local install. For example, I do this with packages such as ffmpeg, mplayer/mencoder, ntfs-3g, mythtv, and so forth. I also have the repo version of some of these packages installed as well only because they are dependancies of other programs. I only need to rebuild my stuff when there are major kernel updates or distro updates.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    190

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    I just tried installing the deb packages from the rvm ppa repository. I only did this as it included debs for the newer nVidia drivers (185.12)

    It all works, but I hit a snag. The mozilla-mplayer plug-in for firefox is no longer working properly (either no video, or can only get it by going to full screen).

    Is it the case that the mozilla plug-in package is statically built using older mplayer versions? What about the newer gnome-mplayer-plugin? (I think I meant gecko-mediaplayer)

    Anyway, does anyone know what is the best way of getting firefox plugins to use the latest mplayer technology?

    Do I have to build my own plug-in?
    Last edited by ticket; May 30th, 2009 at 11:14 PM. Reason: mean't to say gecko-mediaplayer

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    6,934

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Hi ticket,

    Quote Originally Posted by ticket View Post
    I just tried installing the deb packages from the rvm ppa repository. I only did this as it included debs for the newer nVidia drivers (185.12)
    You might be better to start a new thread for this as I am sure that rvm will enthusiastically support his PPA. But hopefully he will see your post here anyway .

    It all works, but I hit a snag. The mozilla-mplayer plug-in for firefox is no longer working properly (either no video, or can only get it by going to full screen).

    Is it the case that the mozilla plug-in package is statically built using older mplayer versions? What about the newer gnome-mplayer-plugin? (I think I meant gecko-mediaplayer)
    I use the mozilla plugin with no problem but I will admit to doing this on another distro so I cannot absolutely guarantee this with ubuntu. The gecko-mediaplayer I have not used but with any luck someone else on this thread can advise.

    Sorry to be of so little help,

    Andrew
    You think that's air you're breathing now?

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Beans
    190

    Re: [Howto] Install the svn Mplayer under Intrepid Ibex

    Well, I removed mozilla-mplayer and installed gecko-mediaplayer. Now any video I play through firefox appears in the player window as a tiny icon-sized video in the top left hand corner. The rest of the player window is black. Sound comes through ok.

    I then tried manually replacing the rvm-installed mplayer binary in /usr/bin with the various mplayer binaries I had lying around (the one I built via this guide, and the original unbuntu deb) but this made no difference - behaviour was the same,

    Used on their own, the mplayer binaries are ok. Except that the rvm one sometimes needed prodding with the space bar to get going.

    I am fairly sure I had the gecko-mediaplayer working in the past, so I think it is an issue with the way things have been installed. Whatever is upsetting mozilla-mplayer is probably also upsetting gecko-media player.

    EDIT: I have found that gnome-mplayer has exactly the same symptoms as gecko-mediaplayer, so the problem is nothing to do with firefox plug-ins, but the way mplayer has integrated with gnome.

    Could it be that I have ffmpeg installed in /usr/local/bin and /usr/bin?
    (as already pointed out, the ffmpeg I built in /usr/local/bin should take preference if it is used).

    The only other thing changed is the nVidia driver.

    Maybe custom repos weren't such a good idea, and classic "./configure. make, sudo make install" are better?
    Last edited by ticket; May 31st, 2009 at 01:02 AM. Reason: clarification

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •