Hi guys,

I'm new to the list but joined to see if I could help with the {j,tsch}ack{1,2,3} issue. :-)

On Sat, 17 Apr 2010, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:37:45PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:
jackd2 shouldn't be considered the successor of jackd1, but an alternative implementation.

Wauw!

Please post a URL to some (more official) summary of the dispute if available somewhere.

It's on the jack-devel and linux-audio-dev lists on 16-Apr-2010.

LAD:  
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2010-April/thread.html
      
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2010-April/027285.html
      
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2010-April/027310.html
      (***) 
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2010-April/027316.html

Jack-Devel: (must be a member to view archives)
            
http://lists.jackaudio.org/private.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org/2010-April/thread.html
            (Most messages are the same, though.)


How about this:

1. Rename jack as jackd1, including empty transitional packages.
2. Try package jackd2 with libraries renamed to not clash.
3. Update jackd1 to similarly use renamed libraries.

If I understand correctly, the *only* packages that need to be virtual are libjack and libjack-dev. The actual libjack-jack1 and libjack-jack2 would then have a dependency on the jackd implementation.

-gabriel

_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to