Video Fix? [Vivaldi]

zalex108

zalex108 @Guest

@jimunderscorep

Hi,
Thanks.

|- Change Vivaldi by Opera -.

Sure, I count with that.
If they share the same code and run the same terminal commands, I imagine it would work.

HTML5
As said, change Vivaldi by Opera.
Widevine
Had an overall look and didn't find the string Vivaldi, yet.
Flash
If the Ubuntu files works on other Distros, then maybe is because Ubuntu is the most up to date?

Foreing Repo.
I trust on Vivaldi Devs, I would use that method if it's the simplest, - even if it works on other Linux systems -.
I don't think they want to harm Users / PCs , I mean, I suppose it's previously tested and it's a trusted source.

A fix for all the system users?
Sure, it would be better, 1 codec file and share it / copy it to all the users.

But,
are the current Opera fixes for all the system?
Is Chromium that way? Or per install?
As you said, even Snaps are already packaged - maybe they don't fail -.

About the Snaps,
I've read a previous post of you about them and the codecs, but at least for other type of installs, if those steps helps, would easily fix many problems on Opera for the moment.

For now, Vivaldi doesn't have Snaps, and seems it will be like this for some time.

But,
if Ubuntu becomes Snap only and deprecates the separated codecs, Vivaldi will search / find a solution until create the Snaps as well.
There are some other Chromium derivatives, should be a workaround for all of them.

Also, it seems that Snaps are not much extended yet, at least what I've read.
I've had to add the Repo on Mint since it's not Out of the Box.

--

Then,
What happens on the Firefox branch?
Are they incompatible files?

Would Chromium, CH Derivatives and Mozilla work together on a single shared codec pack?

"You cannot know the meaning of your life until you are connected to the power that created you". · Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi

A Former User

Sorry, I can't follow your thoughts and continue the conversation. Let me explain only what I do understand.

For starters, ubuntu is not the most up to date distro. If you think so, you probably have not used a rolling release distro.

About the "trust issues" in general.
It is not that I do not trust the devs of this or that app. If I am using the app, it means I am trusting the devs. That is not the point here.
The real point is something else. In fact, it is the thing that sets all those distributions apart. Every single distro builts its packages with a specific set of compilers, using a specific set of parameters and against a specific set of libraries.
Take this as an example and you will understand.
https://forums.opera.com/topic/31150/opera-58-debian-9-stretch-no-support-for-h-264/6
Would someone in his right mind say "ok, these are not built for my system, but I will install them and risk breaking it"?

I have no idea about the rest that you asked and I am not concerned about what firefox does. In fact, firefox has solved the h264 "issue" years ago with cisco's libopenh264.

A Former User @Guest

@jimunderscorep said in Video Fix? [Vivaldi]:

In fact, firefox has solved the h264 "issue" years ago with cisco's libopenh264.

No. It's not true. Firefox use libopenh264 codec only for WebRTC calls. But not for HTML5 video
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1057646

A Former User

I would remove libopenh264 from my system to prove my point with firefox, but it will also completely remove kodi, mpv, chromium, deadbeef and ffmpeg, and I am not in the mood for reinstalling all that again.

A Former User @Guest

@jimunderscorep
Developers don’t agree with you (proof link is upper).
There are not another opinion in this case.

PS: Firefox has same problem with h.264 for Windows XP or Windows Server because it use system codecs (not built in OpenH264 from Cisco).

zalex108

zalex108 @Guest

@jimunderscorep

Ok.
First, I thought LTS means up to date, but since your info is not completely right.

Then, observing again, seems that Chrome and some others, got the codecs built in, so the codec should be up to date on each release.

About:

The real point is something else. In fact, it is the thing that sets all those distributions apart. Every single distro builts its packages with a specific set of compilers, using a specific set of parameters and against a specific set of libraries.
Take this as an example and you will understand.

Ok, thanks for clarify.

And about FF, didn't knew about Cisco and its details about WebRTC and other points https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/html5-audio-and-video-firefox.

So,
then, some Codecs depends on the Distro (and don't know about which has and which not, maybe I'll search later...
How difficult is ~~Linux~~, Patents, Business, ...!!!)

"You cannot know the meaning of your life until you are connected to the power that created you". · Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi

A Former User

if other browsers can work 'out of the box' playing video Opera should be able to do it as well

A Former User

The point is not that other browsers work "out of the box" but how each chromium-based browser achieves it. Shall I make a small comparison of them, one by one?

As seen above, vivaldi downloads the relevant chromium ffmpeg codecs package from ubuntu's repo, gets that precious libffmpeg from there and installs it on a directory for its own use. The downloading part is really sneaky thing to do if you are not on an ubuntu based distro, period.

Opera is built iwth its own libffmpeg BUT it lists chromium ffmpeg codecs as a recommended package. If the user wants, he is free to install it seperately. However, that package is ubuntu specific.

Brave uses the ffmpeg's libav libraries and that;s it.

Chromium on most distros excluding ubuntu is also built to use the ffmpeg's libraries. Chromium on ubuntu is built with its own libffmpeg.

p.s. I have no idea about chrome. I went back to chrome some days ago because I am fed up waiting my distros maintainers to update chromium. Last time I had chrome installed on my system, google was still providing it as a 32bit package and firefox was on version 3.x!

A Former User @Guest

@jimunderscorep said in Video Fix? [Vivaldi]:

I have no idea about chrome.

It's Google...
It's use very simple method - "just pay for codecs and use it". And the are not any problems with codec versions from operating systems.
But it costs money (obviously).

A Former User @Guest

@jimunderscorep said in Video Fix? [Vivaldi]:

Opera is built iwth its own libffmpeg BUT it lists chromium ffmpeg codecs as a recommended package. If the user wants, he is free to install it seperately. However, that package is ubuntu specific.

shame theres no startup documentation when installing Opera about this, its such a pain. theres been posts about this subject since Opera 15

A Former User @Guest

@ultravio1et
That is exactly what I had said 6+ months ago. 1st complain here
https://forums.opera.com/topic/31346/what-still-bugs-me-in-opera-on-linux-and-in-general