On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:26:55AM +0100, David Coppa wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Landry Breuil <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:01:01AM +0100, David Coppa wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Landry Breuil <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Fwiw, after moving away the mpdstate file with the weird time entry, and > >> > recreating my playlist, i havent had any issues with 0.18.9. Maybe in > >> > some > >> > circumstances mpd gets confused with its internal state (as brian linton > >> > described in his STRs), but so far i've monitored the time: entry in the > >> > current mpdstate file and it stayed at 'normal' values.. > >> > >> Nice to hear! > >> > >> Then, I'm ok with the update. > > > > Well, i'd rather have it properly fixed for a normal upgrade path. > > Requiring users to remove/lose their state is not nice. > > Very simple fix: > > into patches/patch-doc_mpdconf_example, change the name of state_file > from "/var/spool/mpd/mpdstate" to, e.g.: > "/var/spool/mpd/state" ?
I dont see how that fixes existing setups. I think digging into the code and finding out the exacts STRs for the problem, and why it ends up with that time overflowed value - check if that's really the source of the problem we're experiencing, and checking that with upstream would be the next steps .. for the MAINTAINER ;) Landry
