reopen 482509
found 482509 0.8.2-3
retitle 482509 Please build against libtwolame, instead of libmp3lame
severity 482509 wishlist
tags 482509 + patch
thanks
Hi,
the following change has been introduced for the 0.8.1-1 upload:
* Change order of the toolame/mp3lame build dependency
Kurt Roeckx schrieb:
It now build-depends on libmp3lame-dev | toolame and
the autobuilders only attempt the first alternative,
so your package is failing to build.
toolame will be removed from the archive in the short term, so please
change this b-d to twolame.
--
Dipl.-Phys. Fabian
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 09:26:25PM +0100, peter green wrote:
The ftbfs on autobuilder issue could be fixed by switching the order of
the optional build-dependencies.
It now build-depends on libmp3lame-dev | toolame and
the autobuilders only attempt the first alternative,
so your package is
It now build-depends on libmp3lame-dev | toolame and
the autobuilders only attempt the first alternative,
so your package
It's not my package, i'm just someone commenting on the bug report.
I have mentioned two different possibilities for fixing this bug in the
bug report. The package now
Hi Peter,
IMO it is a very bad idea to have a package build against a legally
dubious library just because the system it was built on happened to have
it installed.
lame itself is not legally dubious, it's just unfortunate in being
liable to software patent enforcement on MP3 encoding.
On fredagen den 30 maj 2008, you stated the following:
The ftbfs on autobuilder issue could be fixed by switching the order of
the optional build-dependencies.
However, toolame is a stand-alone command-line encoder; it's hardly of any use
when building idjc. Free may really have meant
tags 482509 +patch
thanks
IMO it is a very bad idea to have a package build against a legally
dubious library just because the system it was built on happened to
have it installed.
lame itself is not legally dubious, it's just unfortunate in being
liable to software patent enforcement on MP3
The ftbfs on autobuilder issue could be fixed by switching the order of
the optional build-dependencies.
but IMO it is a very bad idea to have a package build against a legally
dubious library just because the system it was built on happened to have
it installed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Package: idjc
Version: 0.7.5-4
Severity: serious
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20080522 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on i386
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
i386.
This rebuild was done with gcc 4.3 instead of gcc 4.2, because gcc 4.3
is
9 matches
Mail list logo
