[mythtv-users] where to get libvorbis-devel source for mythmusic installation

[Ray Olszewski]

At 10:56 AM 10/7/2003 -0700, Jarod C. Wilson wrote:
>On Tuesday, Oct 7, 2003, at 07:12 US/Pacific, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
>>At 09:04 AM 10/7/2003 -0400, jose rubio wrote:
>>>On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 08:22, Joel Melohn wrote:
>>> > The install instruction for mythmusic on www.mythtv.org indicates that
>>> > libvorbis-devel is a prerequisite for installing mythmusic. Could anyone
>>> > tell me where to get the source for libvorbis-devel?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > Joel
>>>
>>>try this link:
>>>
>>>http://www.google.com/search?q=libvorbis-devel
>>
>>For a search for *source*, the above suggestion is not really very good. 
>>At the least, the Google search should be on "libvorbis-devel source", 
>>not just "libvorbis-devel". More useful advice would be to suggest that 
>>the poster check wherever he got the binary from, since both the GPL and 
>>the LGPL obligate distributors of binaries to provide access to the 
>>source as well.
>>
>>The details of that advice are distro-specific, and the original poster 
>>did not mention what distro he was using. Just as an example, if he were 
>>using Debian with installs via apt, and his /etc/apt/sources.list were 
>>current, all he would need to do is run these two commands:
>>
>>         apt-get update
>>         apt-get source libvorbis-devel
>>
>>I'm sure the answers for other distros as equally simple, but I don't 
>>know them.
>
>Well, he really doesn't actually need the source, he just needs 
>libvorbis-devel installed, so:
>
>apt-get update
>apt-get install libvorbis-devel
>
>And that'll work on Debain and Red Hat alike (assuming you've installed 
>apt). It is also included on the Red Hat CDs, but I can't speak for any 
>other distro.

You are right, of course, Jarod. From the wording of his original question, 
I inferred that he really did want the source, not the binary ... perhaps 
because he was building a system where he compiled everything locally to 
take advantage of some architecture-dependent optimizations that would not 
be available in stock binaries.

I suppose all this is just a reminder that "source" is a term that does 
have a specific, technical meaning in the context of software.