Bug#810445: lirc: please switch to libusb 1.0

2017-01-12 Thread Michael Kolmodin
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:52:12 +0100 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > > That is, is it really, really impossible to use the compatibility > > package which actually works on Fedora to resolve this? > > can you please add more information on that? > how does it work? > >

Bug#810445: lirc: please switch to libusb 1.0

2017-01-12 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
> That is, is it really, really impossible to use the compatibility > package which actually works on Fedora to resolve this? can you please add more information on that? how does it work? G. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#810445: lirc: please switch to libusb 1.0

2016-12-20 Thread Alec Leamas
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 01:20:15 +0100 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-01-09 01:05, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote: > > > I'm asking because there are two options: > > > > - pushing the current upstream version, with a transition, involving > > around 30 rdepends, needing

Bug#810445: lirc: please switch to libusb 1.0

2016-01-08 Thread Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
Hi On 2016-01-08, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Package: lirc > Version: 0.9.0~pre1-1.2 > Severity: wishlist > > Dear Maintainer, > > lirc has a build-depends on libusb-dev. A few years ago upstream > has released a new major version libusb 1.0 with a different API which > aims to fix design

Bug#810445: lirc: please switch to libusb 1.0

2016-01-08 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On 2016-01-09 01:05, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote: > Hi > > On 2016-01-08, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Package: lirc > > Version: 0.9.0~pre1-1.2 > > Severity: wishlist > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > lirc has a build-depends on libusb-dev. A few years ago upstream > > has released a new major