<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
How does code over time become dangerous? Unmaintained gstreamer 0.1
works. I suspect that gbasic still works. It took essentially
deliberate sabotage <br>
by Microsoft to kill Windows XP (e.g. uefi, claiming dangerous
security holes - how can an organization with the programming
resources of Microsoft continually produce dangerous code?). <br>
<br>
The real problem is that gstreamer 1 requires the installation of
the complete bad and ugly libraries where gstreamer 0.1 allowed the
specfic codecs to be installed (this is important for an XO-1 with
1GB total storage).<br>
<br>
I am only volunteering to continue to use gstreamer 0.1 until
gstreamer 1.0 is capable of replacing it. I am hardly eager to
'maintain' working code because it isn't modern. I would certainly
be interested in the specific arguments that running the code is
dangerous.<br>
<br>
Tony<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01/31/2016 05:58 PM, Jonas
Smedegaard wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:145423432029.1890.8319398178495520310@auryn.jones.dk"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Quoting Tony Anderson (2016-01-31 12:27:41)
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">However, I wonder what is a 'modern' gstreamer.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
GStreamer 1.0
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Why would anyone remove a useful capability because it isn't up to
their parochial definition of 'modern'?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
"Someone" being the developers of GStreamer might consider their own
creation to no longer be interesting to maintain. If noone else steps
up to take over maintainer of their old code, then that code over time
becomes *DANGEROUS* to run - which arguably is the case now for
GStreamer 0.10.
Are you volunteering to maintain GStreamer 0.10, or are you aware of
anyone who is?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Why should the very limited resources available to Sugar be forced to
divert their efforts to this 'modernization'?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Core Sugar (at some point called "Sucrose") currently "forces" the use
of GStreamer 1.0, so if you want Sugar to stay with GStreamer 0.10 then
you will need to not only find someone to take over maintenance of
GStreamer 0.10, but also convince Sugar developers to revert to GTK+ 2.x
and GStreamer 0.10 - or fork Sugar (similar to how Mate forked an old
GTK+ 2.x version of GNOME).
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Would you remove all of the Python code in Sugar because it isn't
written in modern Python 3? Should we remove Scratch because it isn't
Scratch 2? Should we stop using Moodle because it isn't Moodle 2?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Debian is a _library_ of sourcecode. Please target those questions at
the various _upstreams_ of the sourcecode, as those are the ones in
power of deciding which toolkits, widget sets etc. to use.
- Jonas
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>