New tool to shrink DVDs in Linux (including a GTK2 interface!)

[GraDy]

Just stumbled on this on the Gentoo forums:
http://dvdshrink.sourceforge.net/
I haven't tried it but it looks promising! No menus, but support for multiple episode DVDs.

[dwflo]

Looks very interesting. Wonder if it will install into Fedora 4?

Dave

[KpeX]

It does NOT do a complete copy of a DVD but only of the main title, ONE audio track and ONE subtitle track. :( Doesn't seem like there are many linux coders either interested in or able to code full disc transcoding.

[dwflo]

:( Doesn't seem like there are many linux coders either interested in or able to code full disc transcoding.

Well it is a start, I say better than nothing, of which we have had.

[H8_2BU]

:( Doesn't seem like there are many linux coders either interested in or able to code full disc transcoding.

I agree.

DVDSHRINk for Windows is pretty easy to get running on a linux box using wine. I use it along with Tmpgenc DVD-AUTHOR so that I can fit two movies on a single DVD.

I tried XDVDSHRINK and it doesn't come close. Perhaps future versions of XDVDSHRINK will support more things. Hey, it's a start! Glad to see someone working on an easy dvd backup program for linux.

[six6]

Originally posted by KpeX
Doesn't seem like there are many linux coders either interested in or able to code full disc transcoding.
And later ...
Originally posted by H8_2BU
DVDSHRINk (sic) for Windows is pretty easy to get running on a linux box using wine...

... so maybe we know the reason no linux coders want to press out and re-write the wheel for re-authoring dvds?

[dwflo]

@six6
Right to the point. :goodpost:

Dave

[H8_2BU]

And later ...


... so maybe we know the reason no linux coders want to press out and re-write the wheel for re-authoring dvds?

Well, it's sad but true for now. There are some proggys in the works right now. DVDSHRINK for windows is a great backup program with awesome quality. Getting it to run under linux for now is pretty basic. I am happy with it.

There is a good write up here ..http://www.creativecomputes.homelinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=12 which explains how to get DVD-SHRINK and DVD-AUTHOR to run using wine.

All is not lost. Linux has come really far and it's just a matter of time before things are made even more simple. Keep up the good work ZIGGGY, your program has potential.

H8

[GraDy]

Yeah, this isn't exactly a DVDShrink-killer, but it's a start! Hopefully the devs will add support for multiple audio and subtitle tracks later. Now we don't have to use the cli to shrink dvds anyways :).

[riggits]

Does ARccos give any problems with this kind of setup? I use DVD43 or AnyDVD on Windows, but can't get those kinds of low-level Windows drivers working on Linux.

[H8_2BU]

Does ARccos give any problems with this kind of setup? I use DVD43 or AnyDVD on Windows, but can't get those kinds of low-level Windows drivers working on Linux.

To bypass this you can rip with DVD Decrypter 3.5.4.0 to an .iso image then open the .iso with dvdshrink and process it. If on some titles you encounter an error in DVD Decrypter go to Tools | Settings | I/O tab then check Ignore Read Errors.

All the tools you need for linux are readily available. You can also use VOBCOPY http://vobcopy.org/ to get the vobs. Depending on your setup and what version of wine you are using, you can open the files located on your hard disk with DVDSHRINK.

The truth is linux offers every tool imaginable to do video processing but gui based support is still limited. It's just a matter of time before better gui support is available and with open source you won't see good programs go down such as DVD Decrypter. Linux has come far and continues to grow.

[shevegen]

Well....
mencoder and transcode allow you to do quite everything.

Now there just need be better GUIs to them.
Sure a GUI isnt as good as command line chained together BUT an easy
GUI to do an easy task (and ONLY this task) would be great.
Like how Dvdshrink or DVD Decrypter work (although both have options i have never used in my whole life)

[six6]

Originally Posted by H8_2BU
Glad to see someone working on an easy dvd backup program for linux.

Originally Posted by GraDy
Hopefully the devs will add support for multiple audio and subtitle tracks later. Now we don't have to use the cli to shrink dvds anyways :).

Originally Posted by shevegen
Now there just need be better GUIs to them... an easy
GUI to do an easy task (and ONLY this task) would be great.

I hate to shamelessly plug bitterbpp (http://sunfryes.com/bitterbpp/), but at this point in the thread I have to ask: what doesn't bitterbpp do that people are looking for? I tried to design it to meet these mentioned needs, and if I'm failing I'd love to know what to improve :)

[H8_2BU]

I hate to shamelessly plug bitterbpp (http://sunfryes.com/bitterbpp/), but at this point in the thread I have to ask: what doesn't bitterbpp do that people are looking for? I tried to design it to meet these mentioned needs, and if I'm failing I'd love to know what to improve :)

I wasn't even aware of your program. I'll give it a try.. Thanks. :)

[amirkhan]

Thats half the problem, people just dont know about these apps..

I say all authors should plug-away...! :-)

[dwflo]

I hate to shamelessly plug bitterbpp (http://sunfryes.com/bitterbpp/), but at this point in the thread I have to ask: what doesn't bitterbpp do that people are looking for? I tried to design it to meet these mentioned needs, and if I'm failing I'd love to know what to improve :)

Looks like an interesting program, problem is I don't use Matroska or Divix or any other codecs. I just want to back up my DVDs, like you would with Shrink. The others do no good, if you do not have a stand alone player capable of playing these discs..

[oldcpu]

I just want to back up my DVDs, like you would with Shrink. The others do no good, if you do not have a stand alone player capable of playing these discs..
I'm very new to this backuping up of DVDs, ... but I did do a quick skim thru this thread to see what I could learn. From what I have read, there are good tools available for linux that will:
a. rip the dvd,
b. dumux/quantize/remux the main title,
c. author a backup of the main title on a dvd with custom menus.

IMHO where Linux is lacking, from what my research has indicated, is with Linux it is very difficult to backup a DVD9 to a DVD5, and retain the same menus, without (I suspect) of a LOT of command line stuff.

But doing a 100% backup up a DVD5 with Linux is very easy. I think it is fair to say that backing up a DVD5 with Linux is in the most part, simply "trivial". Just type in a bash shell:
dvdbackup -M -i/dev/dvd -o/my/dvd/backup/dir/

Then open K3b, select a new Video DVD, and drag the ripped DVD structure into the appropriate section, and burn the DVD. Thats all.

Much too simple for a "complete" legal backup (ie a backup including the FBI warning, region code, etc all included).

It is only if one wants to drop tracks, drop subtitles, add subtitles, and play with the custom menu's, that I currently, with my rather limited knowledge, find Linux frustrating. Of course then one is doing more than a 100% backup. One is customizing their backup.

Some good Linux packages for different stages of the backup process are:

RIPPING TOOLS:

Video-DVDRip [also called dvd::rip - GUI to rip and transcode]
http://www.exit1.org/dvdrip/

lxdvdrip [command line rip, author, preview, burn]
http://developer.berlios.de/projects/lxdvdrip
http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=lxdvdrip

ldvd [DVD backup tool with GUI]
http://ldvd9to5.gff-clan.net/

vobcopy [copies vob files to hard disk]
http://vobcopy.org/projects/c/c.shtml

dvdbackup [rips DVD to harddisk]
http://dvd-create.sourceforge.net/download.shtml
http://dvd-create.sourceforge.net/

kdvdbackup
http://agmanager.sourceforge.net/

subtitleripper [tools to extract DVD-subtitles]
http://subtitleripper.sourceforge.net/ - home page
http://sourceforge.net/projects/subtitleripper - download

streamdvd [fastbackup to DVD on fly – can handle DVD9 to DVD5]
http://www.badabum.de/streamdvd.html

DVDRipOMatic [translate movie from DVD to XviD format]
http://pingwing.xs4all.nl/view.php/page/DVDRipOMatic

LINUX DVD SHRINKING TOOLS:

Video-DVDRip [also called dvd::rip - GUI to rip and transcode]
http://www.exit1.org/dvdrip/

ldvd [DVD backup tool with GUI]

http://ldvd9to5.gff-clan.net/

klvemkdvd [front end for lvemkdvd - build DVD file systems from mpeg files]
[It backs up only one user selectable video track, and one user selectable audio stream]
http://lvempeg.sourceforge.net/klvemkdvd.html

dvdshrink [xdvdshrink: BASH and Perl-Gtk2 to create archival copies of DVD content on single-layer writable DVDs]
[It backs up only one user selectable video track, audio stream, and subtitle]
http://dvdshrink.sourceforge.net/ and http://packman.links2linux.org/?action=630 and http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=133818

[B]LINUX DVD AUTHORING PROGRAMS:

dvdauthor [generates a DVD movie from a valid mpeg2 stream that should play when you put it in a DVD player]
http://dvdauthor.sourceforge.net/ - home
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dvdauthor

kmediafactory [authoring done by dvdauthor, ffmpeg, ImageMagick]
http://susku.pyhaselka.fi/damu/software/kmediafactory/

qdvdauthor [gui frontend for dvd-author and dvd-slideshow]
http://qdvdauthor.sourceforge.net/

dvd-slideshow [create standard DVD video from a batch of pictures]
http://dvd-slideshow.sourceforge.net/

lxdvdrip [command line rip, author, preview, burn]
http://openfacts.berlios.de/index-en.phtml?title=lxdvdrip – home
http://developer.berlios.de/projects/lxdvdrip – download

dvdwizard [wrapper-script automate creation of DVD chapters/menu's. Needs dvdauthor, [No home URL but there is a download for the script]:
http://www.wershofen.de/downloads/dvdwizard.tar.gz

DVDAuthorWizard [create video DVD with multiple titles & menu]
http://pingwing.xs4all.nl/view.php/page/DVDAuthor

lvemkdvd [linux video editor - part of lve package]
http://lvempeg.sourceforge.net/

klvemkdvd [front end for lvemkdvd - build DVD file systems from mpeg files]
http://lvempeg.sourceforge.net/klvemkdvd.html

dvdstyler [frontend for dvdauthor and dvd-slideshow – single movie/single menu]
http://dvdstyler.sourceforge.net/docs-linux.html
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dvdstyler/

varsha [java frontend to dvdauthor, dvd+rw-tools, mkisofs, mjpegtools etc...]
http://varsha.sourceforge.net/ and http://sourceforge.net/projects/varsha

DV Slideshow [creates slideshows from photos, adds music – stores in Sony DV format]
[Not yet released]
http://pingwing.xs4all.nl/view.php/page/DVSlideshow

pgcedit [A DVD IFO and Menu editor designed to allow the modification of the navigation commands and parameters of an already authored DVD structure].
http://home.tiscali.be/debie.roland/pgcedit/
[I][edited on 28-Aug-2005, after I got the package to run]

MEDIA PLAYERS for VIEWING DVD's, COMPLETE WITH MENUS:

ogle [The first opensource DVD player to support DVD menus]
http://www.dtek.chalmers.se/groups/dvd/index.shtml

totem [The official movie player of the GNOME desktop environment based on xine-lib or GStreamer. It features a playlist, a full-screen mode, seek and volume controls, as well as keyboard navigation].
http://www.gnome.org/projects/totem/

Please what packages am I missing??

And until I read this forum a dozen or so minutes ago, I had never heard of bitterbpp. http://sunfryes.com/bitterbpp/about.html I still haven't figured out what it does, but that, I think, is more to my newbie nature than anything else. (At least I hope thats the case).

[patxitron]

Please what packages am I missing??


For DVD playing with full menu and navigation I use xine-ui (the official user interface for xine-lib): http://xinehq.de/

Very nice set of links.

Best regards

[dwflo]

oldcpu

Excellent post, should be made a sticky. :goodpost:
Nice to have all these links, with a brief summery for each one. Thank you for taking the time to do this.

[H8_2BU]

oldcpu

Excellent post, should be made a sticky. :goodpost:
Nice to have all these links, with a brief summery for each one. Thank you for taking the time to do this.


I agree dwflo and those are great programs but you will find most of them on a sticky in the linux section here at doom9. Dvdbackup is a very decent program but it doesn't offer as much as dvdshrink does. Personally I would omit useless audio tracks that take up unwated space. For example, I speak English so Spanish German, and French could be deselected with dvdshrink giving me up to 1.5 gb of of extra space devoted to video. You figure on average the surround audio tracks take up anywhere from 300 too 500 mb each on certain dvds. Plus there is the gui factor for the noobs and well not to sound lazy but I would like to be able to click a few options and walk away. Forget the command line for a second and let's imagine a gui based dvd backup program for linux that even the most inept windows user could use. This is where linux needs to be in order to make Bill Gates eat is own $h!T. If you catch my drift. Forget about the linux guru's that already know what to do, let's help the people that want a stable and secure OS and can get what they need done. Too many people that seem to know everything give the noobs $h!t when they ask questions or want to be able to make that transition to linux. I say let's help everyone do what we need to do even if you need a gui to get it done. It's time for linux to take over and well let's not be ignorant, Linux needs support from everyone. I say let's make it as easy as possible for everyone and make Microsuck a thing of the past. It takes people to do this.

Sorry. I know that I went way off topic but this thread kind of did the same thing. I like to help people that want to get things done under linux but still rely on certain apps for winblows.

I can curently run 2 seperate dvd-shrinks under wine using linux and backup 2 dvds at the same time. Although the shutdown feature of dvdshrink doesnt work, I can give the first run process priority and toss in a simple shutdown command after the second and get two movies backed up while I sleep. IF you search doom9 on running dvdshrink with wine you will find a lot of information about how to "make it so" and if that is not enough for you then take a look here.. Windows dvd-shrink plus tmpgenc dvd author on linux (http://www.creativecomputes.homelinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=12). If you have questions or need help, Creative-Computes is always glad to help.. Just register and post.

[oldcpu]

Personally I would omit useless audio tracks that take up unwated space. For example, I speak English so Spanish German, and French could be deselected with dvdshrink giving me up to 1.5 gb of of extra space devoted to video.
If one only wants the main title and one audio channel, then I think one will find for most DVD9's that the Linux "xdvdshrink" and/or the Linux "klvemkdvd" will do that job. Have you tried them?

xdvdshrink [xdvdshrink: BASH and Perl-Gtk2 to create archival copies of DVD content on single-layer writable DVDs]
http://dvdshrink.sourceforge.net/ and http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=133818

klvemkdvd [front end for lvemkdvd - build DVD file systems from mpeg files] [It backs up only one user selectable video track, and one user selectable audio stream]
http://lvempeg.sourceforge.net/klvemkdvd.html

One can backup two movies with either of these two packages, AND it doesn't take all night. Out of curiousity, does the Windows "dvd-shrink" under Linux wine run faster, slower, or the same, as it does under pure Windows?

Typically, its only if one wants to keep the original menu's, and/or keep the extra movie trailers/commentaries, that the Linux "xdvdshrink" and the Linux "klvemkdvd" are not anywhere near as good. (Also, these two packages can run into difficulty at time if the DVD structure has mixed a trailer/menu in with the same vob sequence of the main title, in which case their underlying scripts get confused, and on occasion grab the trailer instead of the main title).

Forget about the linux guru's that already know what to do, let's help the people that want a stable and secure OS and can get what they need done. Too many people that seem to know everything give the noobs $h!t when they ask questions or want to be able to make that transition to linux.
Some of us would say that running any program under wine goes beyond the newbie stage, and is into the Linux guru stage. Hence I kind of lost the consistency of your logic.

So its neat that you can do things better with the MS-Windows dvd-shrink running under wine, but I honestly think running Linux xdvdshrink, or Linux klvemkdvd, or in Linux typing on a command line [I]"dvdbackup -M -i/dev/dvd -o/my/dvd/backup/dir" and then dragging the output structures into K3b via a mouse, is a heck of a lot easier than trying to get windows "dvd-shrink" running under wine, and then trying to read all the help guides to figure out how to use the MS-Windows program. Again, its only if one wants to go beyond a complete 100% backup of a DVD5, or if one wants to reduce a DVD9 to a DVD5 (and keep more than the main track at the same time) that Linux is not as friendly as the great MS-Windows DVD backup programs.

Hey, I appreciate your "plug/advice" about great windows software that can run under Linux (by using the windows emulator "wine"), but there are many MS-Windows threads, and there is even a separate "DVD-SHRINK under WINE" thread. Is it allowed to focus another thread (such as this thread) on pure LINUX applications, and the progress of Linux applications toward doing a similar job?

[dwflo]

H8_2BU

I was aware of the sticky, just forgot about it. The list posted here seems to have more links than the sticky. I will have to compare, but thanks for reminding me.

Using wine with DVD Shrink is a good idea, but I do not want to use it. I dumped windblows for Linux and very happy not to see any reference of M$ on my system, wine would only remind me of windblows.

Reminds me of OS\2 Warp, it contained Win 3.1, that ran in a VM. At the time, it was nice to be away from win, so I never used it, same now. I can patiently wait for a good Linux alternative for the x86_64 platform. The others are 32bit and do not install on my box.

[oldcpu]

I was aware of the sticky, just forgot about it. The list posted here seems to have more links than the sticky. I will have to compare, but thanks for reminding me.I was most impressed with the Linux app descriptions in the sticky. I posted a subset of the above list to the sticky, to try and update that great sticky.

But a "gripe" about the sticky: the sticky is not in any particular "order" that I could discern (other than Command Line Interface vs GUI), while in the list I posted on this thread, I tried to post the apps in a "functional" order. My apologies to those taking the time to read this thread, if I failed in making that distinction.

As was pointed out by others on this thread, a difficult thing with Linux is learning about the new apps, as they appear. Hence I definitely appreciate the contribution of all those to threads such as this, where they note new (or old) Linux packages that are not contained in lists such as the one on this thread (or for that matter in the random (by function) list in the sticky).

[oldcpu]

I can patiently wait for a good Linux alternative for the x86_64 platform. The others are 32bit and do not install on my box.I have to run to the office now, so can't address this currently. But is it true that none of the Linux 32 bit run on your hardware platform? .... Could it be instead your Linux distribution doesn't give you the 64-bit support that you need? .... This is very much a dynamic situation, as 64-bit is supported more and more every day by the various Linux distributions and Linux apps. Some are getting quite good at providing mult-media/DVD apps for 64 bit. Please, my apologies in advance if you have already have a Linux distribution that you love, have mastered, and refuse to move from (as I can definitely emphathise/sympathise with that sentiment, if true). .... Out of curiousity, what Linux distribution are you using?

[amirkhan]

Lets not forget the great PGCEdit..

http://home.tiscali.be/debie.roland/pgcedit/

[oldcpu]

Lets not forget the great PGCEdit..
http://home.tiscali.be/debie.roland/pgcedit/Not forgotten, but I could never get it to install nor run on my Linux distribution. Probably something silly on my part, but its not a conventional install (ie its neither a .rpm nor a tarball, nor the type of package.sh script that I am used to dealing with, and since its neither of those), and me being a Newbie to all of this, I am outside my comfort zone, and could not figure out how to get it to install.
[Edit - 28-Aug-05: I finally did get PgcEdit to run on my Linux distribution. Earlier failed attempts may have been an installation error on my part].

[dwflo]

I have to run to the office now, so can't address this currently. But is it true that none of the Linux 32 bit run on your hardware platform? .... Could it be instead your Linux distribution doesn't give you the 64-bit support that you need? .... This is very much a dynamic situation, as 64-bit is supported more and more every day by the various Linux distributions and Linux apps. Some are getting quite good at providing mult-media/DVD apps for 64 bit. Please, my apologies in advance if you have already have a Linux distribution that you love, have mastered, and refuse to move from (as I can definitely emphathise/sympathise with that sentiment, if true). .... Out of curiousity, what Linux distribution are you using?

I run Fedora Core 4 x86_64 and I like it above all others, as I have tried them all.
If the application is not in an rpm package made specificly for Fedora 4, either i386 or x86_64, it will not install most of the time. The problem is dependecies, a compiled version or a generic rpm, just will not work. Even if it does install, it will not run properly or not all.

[H8_2BU]

One can backup two movies with either of these two packages, AND it doesn't take all night. Out of curiosity, does the Windows "dvd-shrink" under Linux wine run faster, slower, or the same, as it does under pure Windows?

For me the encoding stage seems to be almost as fast as it would be under windows. The analyzing stage does seem to run a bit slower.


Some of us would say that running any program under wine goes beyond the newbie stage, and is into the Linux guru stage. Hence I kind of lost the consistency of your logic.

The logic is simple to me. That is why I bothered to mention it in the first place. It's not too difficult to cd to the directory that contain dvdshrink.exe and type wine dvdshrink.exe. It will even put a nice little icon on the desktop. The only other issue *may* be to modify the wine conf file a little. It could be easier than trying to install all of the programs and their dependencies in order to do what you suggest. Besides, I agree with you in part but there are still limitations. For me, there just isn't anything out there *yet* that will do what I want. I am keeping my eye on xdvdshrink as it looks very promising and I am hoping that newer versions will do more.


Hey, I appreciate your "plug/advice" about great windows software that can run under Linux (by using the windows emulator "wine"), but there are many MS-Windows threads, and there is even a separate "DVD-SHRINK under WINE" thread. Is it allowed to focus another thread (such as this thread) on pure LINUX applications, and the progress of Linux applications toward doing a similar job?

Well it's true I did plug the dvdshrink thing a bit much and if I offended anyone's eyes I am very sorry. If you go back to the beginning of the thread you will see where myself and a few others were comparing dvdshrink to xdvdshrink and discussing the fact that there are still many limitations when comparing the two. What if a person wants more than AC3 for example? Making the output file any size you want. I could go on but no need. I do look forward to seeing new programs for linux and the further development of the existing ones.

-Peace




H8_2BU

I was aware of the sticky, just forgot about it. The list posted here seems to have more links than the sticky. I will have to compare, but thanks for reminding me.

Using wine with DVD Shrink is a good idea, but I do not want to use it. I dumped windblows for Linux and very happy not to see any reference of M$ on my system, wine would only remind me of windblows.

Reminds me of OS\2 Warp, it contained Win 3.1, that ran in a VM. At the time, it was nice to be away from win, so I never used it, same now. I can patiently wait for a good Linux alternative for the x86_64 platform. The others are 32bit and do not install on my box.


Fair enough. :)

[Joe Fenton]

I run Fedora Core 4 x86_64 and I like it above all others, as I have tried them all.
If the application is not in an rpm package made specificly for Fedora 4, either i386 or x86_64, it will not install most of the time. The problem is dependecies, a compiled version or a generic rpm, just will not work. Even if it does install, it will not run properly or not all.

If you run Fedora Core, I always suggest using the Smart Package Manager.

http://smartpm.org/

It's great at installing all those video packages without the dependency troubles. I was able to install xine, mencode, mplayer, and vlc all at the same time with SPM - something I could never do using RPMs or even yum.

[dwflo]

If you run Fedora Core, I always suggest using the Smart Package Manager.

http://smartpm.org/

It's great at installing all those video packages without the dependency troubles. I was able to install xine, mencode, mplayer, and vlc all at the same time with SPM - something I could never do using RPMs or even yum.

I have installed Smart, it will not run in the X86_64 platform. Like I have stated, if the rpm is not built for FC4 or FC4x86_64, then there can be problems.

[oldcpu]

Like I have stated, if the rpm is not built for FC4 or FC4x86_64, then there can be problems.I understand you prefer Fedora over the other distributions, but is this 64-bit problem (package manager doesn't work) really true for the other Linux Distributions that have working 64-bit support? If it was me, and if there was another distribution that had a workable package manager, I would be hard pressed not to dump Fedora. If there is another distribution with better 64-bit support, you are paying a "frustration" price for your loyalty. You could always switch to another distribution, and then move back when there is better 64-bit Fedora (and 3rd party) support. Your drive looks pretty big. How hard is it to install a dual boot to another Linux Distribution? Anyway, just a suggestion to try and help you overcome this 64-bit hurdle. Best wishes in your efforts to work through this.

[dwflo]

I understand you prefer Fedora over the other distributions, but is this 64-bit problem (package manager doesn't work) really true for the other Linux Distributions that have working 64-bit support? If it was me, and if there was another distribution that had a workable package manager, I would be hard pressed not to dump Fedora. If there is another distribution with better 64-bit support, you are paying a "frustration" price for your loyalty. You could always switch to another distribution, and then move back when there is better 64-bit Fedora (and 3rd party) support. Your drive looks pretty big. How hard is it to install a dual boot to another Linux Distribution? Anyway, just a suggestion to try and help you overcome this 64-bit hurdle. Best wishes in your efforts to work through this.

I have tried every 64bit distro that you can download from DistroWatch and every other site. I chose Fedora because it was the most stable and has the best support forum. The other 64bit distros that do not use the rpm package management systems, have the same problems. It is not a "package manager problem", it is common with all of them, that is why you see so many different packages for some many different flavors of Linux.
Most distros are based on one of the major flavors. I just happen to prefer the Red Hat based distros over the others. Just because I cannot do this perticular task of copying my DVDs, is not enough to make me dump Fedora. I am willing to wait until there is a pakage available for this version. That way I know there will be no problems with installing properly and executing properly.
I you have any knowledge of Linux, you should understand what I am attempting to explain. :)

[oldcpu]

I have tried every 64bit distro that you can download from DistroWatch and every other site. I chose Fedora because it was the most stable and has the best support forum. The other 64bit distros that do not use the rpm package management systems, have the same problems. It is not a "package manager problem", it is common with all of them, that is why you see so many different packages for some many different flavors of Linux.
Most distros are based on one of the major flavors. I just happen to prefer the Red Hat based distros over the others. Just because I cannot do this perticular task of copying my DVDs, is not enough to make me dump Fedora. I am willing to wait until there is a pakage available for this version. That way I know there will be no problems with installing properly and executing properly.
I you have any knowledge of Linux, you should understand what I am attempting to explain. :)
Well, I clearly don't know much about Linux, as I never read anything before (that was convincingly conclusive) that proved Fedora was the "most stable" (ie it is more stable than all the other Linux distributions). But I do understand your point about dependencies and 64-bit compilations that don't function after compiling, for I have heard that the road to 64-bit is not smooth.

When you state you have tried various distributions, please may I inquire if you have downloaded and tried the latest SuSE-9.3 64-bit? If so were you unsuccessful in installing the 3rd party Packman http://packman.links2linux.org/ multimedia upgrades for SuSE? (where most of the Packman multimedia upgrades are available for x86_64).

As I am sure you know, SuSE basically comes crippled in its multimedia capabilities. But with not too much effort, one can bring the SuSE Multimedia up to a pretty good level, by installing multimedia packages from the above Packman site (where the Packman site provides mostly SuSE rpms).

After a steep learning curve, and with the benefit of multi-media packages from Packman, I can now backup the main title in every video DVD I have come across (although unfortunately minus the fancy menus, minus the multiple languages, minus the multiple subtitles, and minus the other fancy features in the DVDs). I use the Packman i.686 packages on my Athlon-2800+, but I suspect the same may now be possible with a 64-bit PC, using Packman x86_64 rpms.

Anyway, given that there is 3rd party rpm/apt support for SuSE in x86_64 in multimedia, I suspect Fedora and other distributions won't be far behind. For all I know there may even be a distribution now that is far ahead of SuSE/Packman combination in x86_64 multimedia.

Best wishes in your efforts to enhance your Linux multi-media capabilities. I suspect, with time (although we may be looking at more than a few years) that there will come a time when 32-bit support will be harder to come by than 64-bit support.

[dwflo]

oldcpu

I have tried Suse 9.3 64bit, and yes there are many multimedia pakages available, there are many available for Fedora. Suse happens to have more available because many people are developing rpms. It has been around longer than Fedora and the Suse userbase is larger. Things are being developed for the Fedora community every day. Each day when I check the repository, I can find new and updated rpms.

As far as Fedora being more stable than others, I can only say it was more stable for me. Somehow it matches perfect to my harware and has not given me any problems whatsoever. As it is often said in the Linux community, what ever works for you, stay with it. We have many choices to choose from, and I test drove every one.

I liked Suse, Ubuntu, Solaris, Knoppix, Mepis, just to name a few, but all of these were not able to detect some of my hardware. CentOS 64 and Fedora 64 were the only two that worked out of the box. The other main reason I stay with Fedora, is the Fedora Forum. It is a great community and they have been very helpful to me. There are a great many resources that I have access to, plus many links. I did not find that with the other forums. I could possibly change, if there is another that comes along and can convince me to switch.

I do have the capability to dual boot as I have been doing . At the moment I have Solaris 10 installed and giving it a tryout. I will use it for a couple of weeks, then try another when it is released. Once Open Suse releases their final, then I will try it out. I do have the first beta of Suse OSS, but it is no different then Suse 9.3, in fact all of the artwork used is 9.3.

There are many that try to emulate Window too much, like aLinux and Linspire, even Suse leans in that direction. With many using KDE as the default desktop, it is very easy to look like Windows. I do not care for KDE now that I have been using Gnome. I am happy to have a Linux that does not look like Windows. :)

[oldcpu]

I have tried Suse 9.3 64bit, and yes there are many multimedia pakages available, there are many available for Fedora. Suse happens to have more available because many people are developing rpms. It has been around longer than Fedora and the Suse userbase is larger. Things are being developed for the Fedora community every day. Each day when I check the repository, I can find new and updated rpms.Since you have tried both Fedora, and SuSE-9.3 64bit (with its many Packman multi-media packages), I have a question. ....

Is it feasible to examine the source code rpms (for 64-bit Packman built apps intended for SuSE) on the Packman site, and use the changes (if any) in those to modify a standard tarball, such that the tarball will work on your 64-bit Fedora? Or perhaps feasible, but not worth the effort?

[dwflo]

Since you have tried both Fedora, and SuSE-9.3 64bit (with its many Packman multi-media packages), I have a question. ....

Is it feasible to examine the source code rpms (for 64-bit Packman built apps intended for SuSE) on the Packman site, and use the changes (if any) in those to modify a standard tarball, such that the tarball will work on your 64-bit Fedora? Or perhaps feasible, but not worth the effort?

It may be possible, but from my understanding from those that have built rpms, they are using tarball source files and building from that. Fedora/Red Hat have an rpm builder included in the distrobution discs. As far as what steps are neccessary, I would assume they must script it to match the libraries and paths used.

From my experiance, when a compiled or generic rpm attemps to install, there are dependency issues. What it means is, libraries or applications needed are not located but are installed. Also is due to the fact, that Fedora uses bleeding edge versions of the kernel and applications. It is basicly a testbed for Red Hat. The same will happen with Suse, the OSS version will contain all the developement packages and once the bugs are worked out, those will be implemented into the next major release of Suse Pro. If you were to use the OSS version of Suse and compare softwares, you would notice the OSS has newer versions of everything, many will have bugs, so it will not be as stable as the regular Suse.

[oldcpu]

If the application is not in an rpm package made specificly for Fedora 4, either i386 or x86_64, it will not install most of the time. The problem is dependecies, a compiled version or a generic rpm, just will not work. Even if it does install, it will not run properly or not all.
Apologies to all for "hijacking" this thread a bit into exploring some of the difficulties with the Linux implementations of the x86_64 hardware architecture, but I think it is directly related to the future of multimedia on Linux. Ultimately, I believe the x86_64 architecture has a lot to offer Linux.

I saw the following post on linuxgazette.net, which describes some of the problems:
http://linuxgazette.net/116/tag/5.html
Part of the problem is that AMD64/EM64T (collectively: x86_64[1]) are sufficiently new that they're relatively new to many long-time Linux people, too. Some will have had recent experience with one x86_64 flavor; few will be in a position to compare and contrast them very well.

Another part of the problem is that there are some subtle migration (32/64) problems, which, speaking for myself, aren't easy to master, let alone know where all the ported distros stand on them. (Some are a problem for all of the distros roughly equally, e.g., the lack of a native OO.o, Macromedia Flash interpreter, WINE, Win32 codecs, etc.) Basically, after booting an x86_64 Linux distribution, running apps provided only in binary IA32 form requires a IA32 environment, which can be either a chroot (in what is otherwise dubbed a "pure64" OS build, with the disadvantage of chewing up disk space with all the duplicated libs, applications, and utilities) or a set of separate 32-bit libs known to the dynamic linker and in a parallel directory structure (reserving "lib" for IA32, using "lib64" for x86_64), a category of solution termed a "multiarch" OS build -- which has the disadvantage (if I understand correctly) that compiling and installing new 32-bit apps and libs is difficult.

A good survey of x86_64 distributions would start with classifying each as to whether it uses the pure64 or multiarch approach. And not even Distrowatch seems to have attempted that, so far.

Of course, you can also ignore the CPU instruction set extensions and run a regular old IA32 ("x86") distro[2] -- bringing with it the relatively smaller memory map, but simplifying software support -- but what fun would that be? :)

[1] The nomenclature is hopelessly confused: AMD say that "x86_64" (their original term for the extended architecture) is now deprecated and that everyone should say "AMD64", but that of course would make an awkward way to encompass Intel's compatible EM64T implementation that competes with AMD's. A minority in the Linux community, such as the Debian Project, call the architecture "amd64"; I follow the most-common usage and say "x86_64", since the term is vendor-neutral.

[2] This level of backwards compatibility is the architecture's salient advantage over Intel's still-exotic and incompatible IA64 Itanium/Itanium2 (dubbed "Itanic" by TheReg) architecture -- whose existence hints at one of the problems with "lib64" directories: the namespace collision with Itanium.

[dwflo]

olcpu

Now that makes perfect sense. Thanks for posting the article, makes things a little clearer for me.

[oldcpu]

Now that makes perfect sense. Thanks for posting the article, makes things a little clearer for me.I've been trying to find something "recent" on the progress of 64-bit, but haven't succeeded. I did find this one-year old article, with a proposed approch to the multiarchitecture problem posed by x86_64. I'm not sure how many of these ideas were/will-be implemented:
http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/ideas/multiarch/

I believe 64-bit does hold the promise of much faster video encoding, so it would be good to see the architecture standards/development problems sorted (if they haven't been already).

[dwflo]

oldcpu
I had read that article recently and it seems that many of those issues have been addressed. From my point of view, there are too many of those who do not have a 64bit processor and when it comes to cross-platform, it is beyond their knowledge. I see that most often in the Fedora Forum, where someone has made an rpm out of a source, or written their own application, without realizing many users of the 64bit will want to install it. Now the individual must edit in a disclaimer to their post.
I think in time the issues will be resolved, especially since so many from Winblows are becoming aware. You would almost think M$ was the first to support the 64 architecture, but Linux was way ahead by many months, more like a year ahead.

[Joe Fenton]

Don't know what you're talking about. I'm running 64bit Fedora Core on a dual Opteron. The Smart PM works just fine on 64bit and has no trouble installing and updating both 32bit and 64bit packages. I've got 64bit versions of all the video packages installed via SPM and they work fine.

[dwflo]

Don't know what you're talking about. I'm running 64bit Fedora Core on a dual Opteron. The Smart PM works just fine on 64bit and has no trouble installing and updating both 32bit and 64bit packages. I've got 64bit versions of all the video packages installed via SPM and they work fine.

I have never been able to get SPM to work, I have installed and reinstalled several times. It just will not run on my machine. I have followed the posts at Fedora Forum, and they all state it would run, but I have not had any success. I would like to give SPM a try, but until I can figure out why it will not run or compile, I cannot take the word of those who advocate its use.

[Joe Fenton]

Hmm... there are packages for FC4 here:
http://rpmforge.net/user/packages/smart/

Those are 32bit packages, but it should still work. There are x86_64 packages, but they are for FC3. Looks like they haven't updated those to FC4... sometimes they won't because the older packages work fine. XMMS wasn't available for FC3 x86_64 for a long time because the FC2 x86_64 packages worked fine. It wasn't until a major update of xmms that they bothered to make FC3 x86_64 packages.

[dwflo]

Hmm... there are packages for FC4 here:
http://rpmforge.net/user/packages/smart/

Those are 32bit packages, but it should still work. There are x86_64 packages, but they are for FC3. Looks like they haven't updated those to FC4... sometimes they won't because the older packages work fine. XMMS wasn't available for FC3 x86_64 for a long time because the FC2 x86_64 packages worked fine. It wasn't until a major update of xmms that they bothered to make FC3 x86_64 packages.

Thanks Joe, I will give it another try. Downloaded .036-1 for fc4x86_64. I think it was the same Dries version tried before. The version 0.37-11 32bit packages will not work, they will install, but not run.

I am sure you are aware of the Fedora "acceptable depositories" and the discussion going on about the differences of opintions between all parties. That has been a problem I have experianced from the different repositories. Livna and Freshmeat are the only two that Fedora accepts as following their guidlines. I have to state that those two repos rpms have allways installed and worked on my system.

[Joe Fenton]

Thanks Joe, I will give it another try. Downloaded .036-1 for fc4x86_64. I think it was the same Dries version tried before. The version 0.37-11 32bit packages will not work, they will install, but not run.

I am sure you are aware of the Fedora "acceptable depositories" and the discussion going on about the differences of opintions between all parties. That has been a problem I have experianced from the different repositories. Livna and Freshmeat are the only two that Fedora accepts as following their guidlines. I have to state that those two repos rpms have allways installed and worked on my system.

Remember that SPM needs to be run as root. Either switch to superuser or use sudo. I generally pull up a terminal, do "su -", then "smart --gui". SPM won't run from the entry it makes in the Applications menu because of this root issue. It's the only problem I've run into with it.

Yes, there are all kinds of discussions on which repositories you can mix and match without dependency problems. All I can say is that the default repositories SPM uses has everything I've looked for, and I've never had a dependency problem. Before I started using SPM, I couldn't install xine, mplayer, mencoder, and vlc all at the same time. I could get any two, but not all of them. SPM gets all of them installed with no problem, and they all run. :D