Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 10:27:12AM +0100, rosea grammostola wrote:



I'm not sure you saw my message on LAD, so here it is again:
But I suggest you to enable both --classic and --dbus for Debian,

Yep, I saw it and acted accordingly:;a=commitdiff;h=53ebc95b5bf32a6f6fafd05ff85f2671431b72d3

It's working, I've tested it, though I find it a little bit useless at
the moment. Besides ladish, who needs it? Anyway, I don't think it's
causing any harm to have it, so we can keep it enabled.

Ok, thanks for your work.

Maybe it's also good to package Ladish.

You must be joking. Ladish is in early development, has a preview-0.2
version out and the majority of jackified apps don't support it. I've
been talking to Nedko (the one and only ladish developer) yesterday, and
he consideres it experimental. Not in the Debian sense of experimental,
more as in pre-alpha.

It also requires a patched jackd2, these patches are in nedko's private
jackd2 repository. So until they got applied to jackd2, there's neither
no use in jackdbus nor in ladish based on it.
Point taken. I don't think it's an good idea to use the ladi branch in jack2.
For packaging Ladish I thought you might package it also for experimental.

Anyway, I doubt whether I would spent much time on LASH stuff atm...


pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to