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

Reply via email to