On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 16:55, Adrian Knoth <a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de> wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 03:55:36PM -0400, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > >> >> "we switch to jackd2 now". No one disagreed. >> > Nope, that's right: jack2 now. Enable (easy) user switching later. >> >> + possibly in time for squeeze, which is Reinhard's question: are we >> still going to try for it, and therefore, do we need to get a more >> detailed note to release-team (last week) about what it entails for >> coordination between this team and them. > > I think it's not too hard to revive the jackd1 package, so we can at > least provide jackd1 and jackd2 in squeeze. > > Given the tons of C++ symbols in jackd2, I'd also suggest to make the > jackd1 package the official dev package and also the "donator" of the > symbols file.
I'm quite confused by this. AFAIK, jack is a pure C API, so C++ symbols have no place in there. However, I understood from the last discussion that those are not really bogus, but are some sort of internal (server-lib) API, which is not allowed to be used by regular clients. Is this correct? Anyway, I really think that for jack it is much better to use a shlibs file. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list email@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers