On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 10:12, Reinhard Tartler <siret...@tauware.de> wrote: >> My idea was to have the j-a-c-k (jackd2) package provide the non-virtual >> package libjack0, just like today. I didn't think it was important >> which libjack implementation apps build against, and this seemed the >> easiest / least disruptive way. > > Well, we prefer (I think adi has expressed this explicitly) to have > applications built against jackd1. I think the easiest and most obvious > way for this is to make libjack0 a non-virtual package produced by > j-a-c-k (jackd1), and have a separate libjack-jackd2-0 package produced > by the (NEW) jackd2 source package.
To build against jackd1, it is necessary only that jack1 provides the non-virtual libjack-dev. The name of the library package itself is of no relevance, I think. Julien Cristau wrote: >> For the default install, we want to install jackd2 by default as we >> believe that it provides a superiour user experience. However, we want >> to have all applications built against libjack0 from jackd1. Moreover, > OK as I said above I don't understand this bit... libjack0 has a clearer ABI as it is pure C. It thus makes it easier to detect borkage. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers