[ffmpeg] Block "tensorflow" and others for the "all" feature on non-x64.

[BillyONeal]

In #21980 , we removed all the blocks for tensorflow which were merely replicating that upstream's "supports" expression. That is the correct behavior: if upstream adds support for a thing, it should start being tested downstream. However, the "all" and "all-nonfree" features of ffmpeg attempt to turn on what is really "all supported" rather than "all", so the feature-dependency needs to be guarded.

Note that the ffmpeg[tensorflow] feature remains unguarded! It is ffmpeg[all]'s dependency on ffmpeg[tensorflow] that is guarded.

[github-actions]

You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:

• ports/ffmpeg/vcpkg.json

Valid values for the license field are listed at https://spdx.org/licenses/

[cenit]

what about converting control file of vcpkg-ci-ffmpeg at the same time in this PR?

[cenit]

also, very important,
vcpkg-ci-ffmpeg is STILL a cascade failure in these triplets:

x64_uwp
arm64_windows
arm_uwp

[Sibras]

The patch should actually be updated to be
!(x86 | arm | uwp) & !static

Not sure why it wasnt kept at that to begin with

[JackBoosY]

Please note that due to the association between ci-opencv and ci-ffmpeg, we can only solve the problem by de-testing the feature tensorflow in ci-ffmpeg.

[BillyONeal]

The patch should actually be updated to be !(x86 | arm | uwp) & !static

Tensorflow itself phrases it in the positive ("only x64 is supported"), not "these architectures are not supported".

Not sure why it wasnt kept at that to begin with

Because we shouldn't be needing to replicate the "supports" results for every downstream port in the tree.

[github-actions]

You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:

• ports/ffmpeg/vcpkg.json

Valid values for the license field are listed at https://spdx.org/licenses/

[BillyONeal]

vcpkg-ci-ffmpeg:arm64-windows is still unhappy but the others are fixed; I think this is good enough to ensure CI is testing something. I still think overall we should be having a validation step that fails the CI run if one of these test ports cascades.

[ras0219-msft]

This LGTM, but shouldn't fixing arm64 be as simple as modifying these platform clauses a bit more?

[BillyONeal]

This LGTM, but shouldn't fixing arm64 be as simple as modifying these platform clauses a bit more?

The issue is that it's hard for me to test because arm64 isn't working for anything on my machine, and I already spent like 4 hours trying to figure out why and can't really afford to invest further here.