Are ffmpeg56 and ffmpeg54 packages discontinued?
It seems that the following packages were not included in official yakkety repos, even if they were in xenial.
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56
libavformat-ffmpeg56
libavutil-ffmpeg54
Are they unuseful / discontinued or should I consider that the following are valid alternatives?
libavcodec57
libavformat57
libavcodec-extra57
libavcodec-extra
libavutil55
ffmpeg avconv libav
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
add a comment |
It seems that the following packages were not included in official yakkety repos, even if they were in xenial.
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56
libavformat-ffmpeg56
libavutil-ffmpeg54
Are they unuseful / discontinued or should I consider that the following are valid alternatives?
libavcodec57
libavformat57
libavcodec-extra57
libavcodec-extra
libavutil55
ffmpeg avconv libav
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
add a comment |
It seems that the following packages were not included in official yakkety repos, even if they were in xenial.
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56
libavformat-ffmpeg56
libavutil-ffmpeg54
Are they unuseful / discontinued or should I consider that the following are valid alternatives?
libavcodec57
libavformat57
libavcodec-extra57
libavcodec-extra
libavutil55
ffmpeg avconv libav
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
It seems that the following packages were not included in official yakkety repos, even if they were in xenial.
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56
libavformat-ffmpeg56
libavutil-ffmpeg54
Are they unuseful / discontinued or should I consider that the following are valid alternatives?
libavcodec57
libavformat57
libavcodec-extra57
libavcodec-extra
libavutil55
ffmpeg avconv libav
ffmpeg avconv libav
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
asked Nov 23 '16 at 8:57
jasminesjasmines
6,346126295
6,346126295
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56 (FFmpeg library with additional de/encoders for audio/video codecs), libavformat-ffmpeg56 (FFmpeg library with (de)muxers for multimedia containers - runtime files) and libavutil-ffmpeg54 (FFmpeg library with functions for simplifying programming - runtime files) have been upgraded in Ubuntu 16.10, 17.04, 17.10, 18.04 and 18.10 to libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 and libavutil55.
The same packages have been upgraded in Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04 to libavcodec-extra58 libavformat58 and libavutil56.
Open the terminal and type:
sudo apt-get install libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 libavutil55
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
add a comment |
Usually when a package is updated its name does not change. In cases like this,
the name changes because there has a binary-incompatible update to the library (software compiled to work with the older version will no longer work with the new version). The name change allows you to have both versions installed side by side in case some applications depend on the older version and some depend on the newer.
This means you can't use the newer ones as a drop-in replacement for the older ones, because software has to be recompiled (and patched, usually) to work with the newer binaries.
That said, in this case those particular older packages are no longer present in yakkety, meaning that no packages in yakkety depend on them anymore and they can be removed to clear up space. The explanation will be that the software in yakkety has been compiled against the newer versions.
You don't use these packages directly so you can safely just depend upon the dependency handling of APT to ensure the correct ones are installed - if APT lets you remove the old ones (or aptitude search ~o shows them as obsolete) then you can remove them.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f852605%2fare-ffmpeg56-and-ffmpeg54-packages-discontinued%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56 (FFmpeg library with additional de/encoders for audio/video codecs), libavformat-ffmpeg56 (FFmpeg library with (de)muxers for multimedia containers - runtime files) and libavutil-ffmpeg54 (FFmpeg library with functions for simplifying programming - runtime files) have been upgraded in Ubuntu 16.10, 17.04, 17.10, 18.04 and 18.10 to libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 and libavutil55.
The same packages have been upgraded in Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04 to libavcodec-extra58 libavformat58 and libavutil56.
Open the terminal and type:
sudo apt-get install libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 libavutil55
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
add a comment |
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56 (FFmpeg library with additional de/encoders for audio/video codecs), libavformat-ffmpeg56 (FFmpeg library with (de)muxers for multimedia containers - runtime files) and libavutil-ffmpeg54 (FFmpeg library with functions for simplifying programming - runtime files) have been upgraded in Ubuntu 16.10, 17.04, 17.10, 18.04 and 18.10 to libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 and libavutil55.
The same packages have been upgraded in Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04 to libavcodec-extra58 libavformat58 and libavutil56.
Open the terminal and type:
sudo apt-get install libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 libavutil55
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
add a comment |
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56 (FFmpeg library with additional de/encoders for audio/video codecs), libavformat-ffmpeg56 (FFmpeg library with (de)muxers for multimedia containers - runtime files) and libavutil-ffmpeg54 (FFmpeg library with functions for simplifying programming - runtime files) have been upgraded in Ubuntu 16.10, 17.04, 17.10, 18.04 and 18.10 to libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 and libavutil55.
The same packages have been upgraded in Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04 to libavcodec-extra58 libavformat58 and libavutil56.
Open the terminal and type:
sudo apt-get install libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 libavutil55
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56 (FFmpeg library with additional de/encoders for audio/video codecs), libavformat-ffmpeg56 (FFmpeg library with (de)muxers for multimedia containers - runtime files) and libavutil-ffmpeg54 (FFmpeg library with functions for simplifying programming - runtime files) have been upgraded in Ubuntu 16.10, 17.04, 17.10, 18.04 and 18.10 to libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 and libavutil55.
The same packages have been upgraded in Ubuntu 18.10 and 19.04 to libavcodec-extra58 libavformat58 and libavutil56.
Open the terminal and type:
sudo apt-get install libavcodec-extra57 libavformat57 libavutil55
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
edited 6 mins ago
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
answered Nov 23 '16 at 9:12
karelkarel
59.4k13129151
59.4k13129151
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
add a comment |
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
I have these packages installed too, but not as upgrades of the 54 and 56 versions. Should I remove the old ones?
– jasmines
Nov 23 '16 at 9:29
1
1
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
The new packages and the old packages have identical package descriptions, so yes, you should remove libavcodec-ffmpeg-extra56, libavformat-ffmpeg56 and libavutil-ffmpeg54 .
– karel
Nov 23 '16 at 9:32
1
1
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
Unless you've developed software yourself that uses these shared libraries, there should be no need to install the new versions manually. If you install any software that uses them, it will automatically install the libraries.
– thomasrutter
Oct 11 '17 at 0:29
add a comment |
Usually when a package is updated its name does not change. In cases like this,
the name changes because there has a binary-incompatible update to the library (software compiled to work with the older version will no longer work with the new version). The name change allows you to have both versions installed side by side in case some applications depend on the older version and some depend on the newer.
This means you can't use the newer ones as a drop-in replacement for the older ones, because software has to be recompiled (and patched, usually) to work with the newer binaries.
That said, in this case those particular older packages are no longer present in yakkety, meaning that no packages in yakkety depend on them anymore and they can be removed to clear up space. The explanation will be that the software in yakkety has been compiled against the newer versions.
You don't use these packages directly so you can safely just depend upon the dependency handling of APT to ensure the correct ones are installed - if APT lets you remove the old ones (or aptitude search ~o shows them as obsolete) then you can remove them.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
add a comment |
Usually when a package is updated its name does not change. In cases like this,
the name changes because there has a binary-incompatible update to the library (software compiled to work with the older version will no longer work with the new version). The name change allows you to have both versions installed side by side in case some applications depend on the older version and some depend on the newer.
This means you can't use the newer ones as a drop-in replacement for the older ones, because software has to be recompiled (and patched, usually) to work with the newer binaries.
That said, in this case those particular older packages are no longer present in yakkety, meaning that no packages in yakkety depend on them anymore and they can be removed to clear up space. The explanation will be that the software in yakkety has been compiled against the newer versions.
You don't use these packages directly so you can safely just depend upon the dependency handling of APT to ensure the correct ones are installed - if APT lets you remove the old ones (or aptitude search ~o shows them as obsolete) then you can remove them.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
add a comment |
Usually when a package is updated its name does not change. In cases like this,
the name changes because there has a binary-incompatible update to the library (software compiled to work with the older version will no longer work with the new version). The name change allows you to have both versions installed side by side in case some applications depend on the older version and some depend on the newer.
This means you can't use the newer ones as a drop-in replacement for the older ones, because software has to be recompiled (and patched, usually) to work with the newer binaries.
That said, in this case those particular older packages are no longer present in yakkety, meaning that no packages in yakkety depend on them anymore and they can be removed to clear up space. The explanation will be that the software in yakkety has been compiled against the newer versions.
You don't use these packages directly so you can safely just depend upon the dependency handling of APT to ensure the correct ones are installed - if APT lets you remove the old ones (or aptitude search ~o shows them as obsolete) then you can remove them.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
Usually when a package is updated its name does not change. In cases like this,
the name changes because there has a binary-incompatible update to the library (software compiled to work with the older version will no longer work with the new version). The name change allows you to have both versions installed side by side in case some applications depend on the older version and some depend on the newer.
This means you can't use the newer ones as a drop-in replacement for the older ones, because software has to be recompiled (and patched, usually) to work with the newer binaries.
That said, in this case those particular older packages are no longer present in yakkety, meaning that no packages in yakkety depend on them anymore and they can be removed to clear up space. The explanation will be that the software in yakkety has been compiled against the newer versions.
You don't use these packages directly so you can safely just depend upon the dependency handling of APT to ensure the correct ones are installed - if APT lets you remove the old ones (or aptitude search ~o shows them as obsolete) then you can remove them.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
answered Mar 14 '17 at 23:38
thomasrutterthomasrutter
26.9k46489
26.9k46489
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f852605%2fare-ffmpeg56-and-ffmpeg54-packages-discontinued%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
