Re: Proven Packagers: update Audacity
Il giorno mar, 09/02/2021 alle 18.21 +, Ian McInerney ha scritto: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:58 PM Germano Massullo < > germano.massu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can anybody please help updating Audacity package? I cannot help > > this > > time. Despite this package has 2 maintainers, the software is no > > up-to-date and is highly unstable and crashes every time you use it > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836497 > > > > > Speaking as a maintainer of it, the short answer is that I have not > had time to untangle the mess that is the most recent upstream 2.4.2 > release. Upstream has made many changes that are becoming unfriendly > to packagers in the recent release that I haven't had the day or so > it would probably take to sort through them (they completely removed > their autotools build system in a patch release - with no deprecation > warning and without a fully working CMake build system that can use > system libraries, they are switching to their own fork of wxWidgets > and are starting to enforce its usage by build system checks, etc.). > > I basically took the package to make sure it didn't get retired > during the FTBFS after GCC 10 landed, but I am not a daily user of > it. If you want to help maintain the package, just let me know and I > can add you. I can help too, I'm a user of many audio packages, and Audacity is one of the most important. My FAS user is tartina Ciao Guido ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proven Packagers: update Audacity
Please do. Yes, it's...messy. -- Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, February 9, 2021 12:21 PM, Ian McInerney wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:58 PM Germano Massullo > wrote: > > > Can anybody please help updating Audacity package? I cannot help this > > time. Despite this package has 2 maintainers, the software is no > > up-to-date and is highly unstable and crashes every time you use it > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836497 > > Speaking as a maintainer of it, the short answer is that I have not had time > to untangle the mess that is the most recent upstream 2.4.2 release. Upstream > has made many changes that are becoming unfriendly to packagers in the recent > release that I haven't had the day or so it would probably take to sort > through them (they completely removed their autotools build system in a patch > release - with no deprecation warning and without a fully working CMake build > system that can use system libraries, they are switching to their own fork of > wxWidgets and are starting to enforce its usage by build system checks, etc.). > > I basically took the package to make sure it didn't get retired during the > FTBFS after GCC 10 landed, but I am not a daily user of it. If you want to > help maintain the package, just let me know and I can add you. > > -Ian signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proven Packagers: update Audacity
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:58 PM Germano Massullo wrote: > Can anybody please help updating Audacity package? I cannot help this > time. Despite this package has 2 maintainers, the software is no > up-to-date and is highly unstable and crashes every time you use it > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836497 Speaking as a maintainer of it, the short answer is that I have not had time to untangle the mess that is the most recent upstream 2.4.2 release. Upstream has made many changes that are becoming unfriendly to packagers in the recent release that I haven't had the day or so it would probably take to sort through them (they completely removed their autotools build system in a patch release - with no deprecation warning and without a fully working CMake build system that can use system libraries, they are switching to their own fork of wxWidgets and are starting to enforce its usage by build system checks, etc.). I basically took the package to make sure it didn't get retired during the FTBFS after GCC 10 landed, but I am not a daily user of it. If you want to help maintain the package, just let me know and I can add you. -Ian ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proven Packagers: update Audacity
Il 09/02/21 19:06, Gwyn Ciesla via devel ha scritto: > I'll take care of it. Thank you! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Proven Packagers: update Audacity
I'll take care of it. -- Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, February 9, 2021 11:57 AM, Germano Massullo wrote: > Can anybody please help updating Audacity package? I cannot help this > time. Despite this package has 2 maintainers, the software is no > up-to-date and is highly unstable and crashes every time you use it > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836497 > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Proven Packagers: update Audacity
Can anybody please help updating Audacity package? I cannot help this time. Despite this package has 2 maintainers, the software is no up-to-date and is highly unstable and crashes every time you use it https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836497 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
CubicSDR (Ham Radio panadapter spectrum visualizer using inexpensive receivers) upstream moved to wxWidgets 3.1 over 18 months ago. While I had some success in backing out some specific changes that let it compile with wxGTK 3.0, upstream has moved on considerably since then, making extensive use of wxGLAttributes in various calls, which is far harder to back out. Furthermore, upstream won't look at issues on older releases. [1] Lending some urgency are multiple abrt-reported segfaults, including on F30 and F31 [2]. Either a wxGTK 3.1 package in the main repos, or in copr, will be needed to make this package usable again. [1] https://github.com/cjcliffe/CubicSDR/issues/726 [2] https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/summary/?component_names=CubicSDR=2019-01-01%3A2019-12-03=m -Matt ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
David Timms wrote: > And this usage can be the impetus that allows library development to be > well tested by multiple real applications and issues > known/fixes/improvements in place before the library hardens it's > ABI/API interfaces at the release. But why would you want to abuse renowned applications such as Audacity in stable releases of Fedora for that purpose? Feel free to ship wxGTK 3.1 and an Audacity built against it in a Copr, for people deliberately opting in to testing such a build. But please do not force it onto users of stable releases, who have not opted in to becoming beta testers. > In this case extending this idea to also make other Fedora packaged, > wxGTK3 using applications [1] built with the (hopefully soon) to be > released library would allow more thorough testing of the library, and > give us ahead of time the things that need work - in either the library > or the applications. Sure, but that is what Copr is for. Please put up a wxGTK 3.1 Copr and start rebuilding applications against it there (if rebuilding is actually needed). > Given it would be me doing the work - although I'll need some guidance - > are any guidelines etc. actually being broken if I was to do the > modularity thing for wxGTK/Audacity ? Not sure, but what is sure is that it would make your build of Audacity much less useful compared to using the stable wxGTK that ships in stable Fedora and to which all other wxGTK applications are linked by default. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 8:46 am, Scott Talbert wrote: On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Scott Talbert wrote: Ouch. So now you're talking about wanting to package a *fork* of a development release of wxGTK. No. (unless it was done by simply turning on a config item). Looking closer, building audacity requires an already built wxGTK/dev, which is a separate process. I'm not sure the Fedora packaging system could even do that - build a build requires from a bundled lib, and then install it before the main application build ? I would strongly suggesting talking to Audacity team about why they need a fork of wx 3.1.x and why they cannot get their fixes/changes upstreamed (and backported to wx 3.0). Upstream wx is usually pretty good about backporting fixes to 3.0 if you request it. I just took a quick look at the changes in their wx 3.1.1 fork. It appears they are all Windows and Mac related. So, their instructions to use their fork when building on Linux make no sense. Interesting... and is there any difference between 3.0.4 and what they have as 3.1.1 ? I would recommend doing as Kevin suggested and continue to build against wx 3.0.4 in Fedora. If you run into a bug that has been fixed in wx 3.1.x, feel free to report it and we will get the fix backported. While the above is what I've already done locally and what I'll do... I think it's a good idea to make available these (advanced) build environments, without requiring a whole "rawhide" machine to do this on (which currently still only has the old version anyway). Don't we want to make it easier for all sorts of people to contribute to open source development. Modules sound like an easy way for that to happen (for the user of the module). We need tester's and developers using future "pieces" that interest them without foregoing an otherwise stable machine. And this usage can be the impetus that allows library development to be well tested by multiple real applications and issues known/fixes/improvements in place before the library hardens it's ABI/API interfaces at the release. In this case extending this idea to also make other Fedora packaged, wxGTK3 using applications [1] built with the (hopefully soon) to be released library would allow more thorough testing of the library, and give us ahead of time the things that need work - in either the library or the applications. Given it would be me doing the work - although I'll need some guidance - are any guidelines etc. actually being broken if I was to do the modularity thing for wxGTK/Audacity ? ps. I haven't come across the docs on the packaging side of modules - any pointers, please ? Dave. [1] https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/nAopftRQuTcxokDbHP~nkw ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
David Timms wrote: > Perhaps calling a compat package 3.2.0.develseries.3.1.3 etc would make > sense to indicate to consumers that they are using what will soon (TM) > become the main version. Please no. There is a numeric version, please use that, not some ugly version hack. What would be acceptable, I suppose, is: Name: wxGTK3.2 Version: 3.1.3 though some might even object to that (and demand Name: wxGTK3.1 instead). Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Scott Talbert wrote: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. see: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Building_On_Linux or from the horse - (Mr Ed): https://github.com/audacity/audacity/blob/master/linux/build.txt " wxWidgets: 1) Clone wxWidgets and checkout 3.1.1 from the Audacity fork of the wxWidgets project: https://github.com/audacity/wxWidgets/ " I missed the fact that they build against their fork of wxWidgets from their own repo; I'm not sure whether it started as 3.1.1 or not. Ouch. So now you're talking about wanting to package a *fork* of a development release of wxGTK. I would strongly suggesting talking to Audacity team about why they need a fork of wx 3.1.x and why they cannot get their fixes/changes upstreamed (and backported to wx 3.0). Upstream wx is usually pretty good about backporting fixes to 3.0 if you request it. I just took a quick look at the changes in their wx 3.1.1 fork. It appears they are all Windows and Mac related. So, their instructions to use their fork when building on Linux make no sense. I would recommend doing as Kevin suggested and continue to build against wx 3.0.4 in Fedora. If you run into a bug that has been fixed in wx 3.1.x, feel free to report it and we will get the fix backported. Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019, David Timms wrote: David Timms wrote: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. see: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Building_On_Linux or from the horse - (Mr Ed): https://github.com/audacity/audacity/blob/master/linux/build.txt " wxWidgets: 1) Clone wxWidgets and checkout 3.1.1 from the Audacity fork of the wxWidgets project: https://github.com/audacity/wxWidgets/ " I missed the fact that they build against their fork of wxWidgets from their own repo; I'm not sure whether it started as 3.1.1 or not. Ouch. So now you're talking about wanting to package a *fork* of a development release of wxGTK. I would strongly suggesting talking to Audacity team about why they need a fork of wx 3.1.x and why they cannot get their fixes/changes upstreamed (and backported to wx 3.0). Upstream wx is usually pretty good about backporting fixes to 3.0 if you request it. Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
David Timms wrote: > see: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Building_On_Linux > or from the horse - (Mr Ed): > https://github.com/audacity/audacity/blob/master/linux/build.txt > " > wxWidgets: > > 1) Clone wxWidgets and checkout 3.1.1 from the Audacity fork of the > wxWidgets project: > https://github.com/audacity/wxWidgets/ > " > > I missed the fact that they build against their fork of wxWidgets from > their own repo; I'm not sure whether it started as 3.1.1 or not. They have been writing this all this time, this is not new in 2.3.3. Just ignore it, as usual when an upstream recommends using bundled libraries. > Well, ... it does build and run against 3.0.4, but lots of "already > fixed" - in wxGTK - issues are present. Those are not your job as the Audacity packager to fix. Just build it against 3.0.4. We will get wxGTK 3.2.x when it is actually released. >> Modules are always the wrong solution for libraries because they are > Isn't that exactly what the module examples are doing ? Those examples are bad. The Modularity team wants to push modules for this use case, but they are absolutely not suitable. See the recent threads about Modularity. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 8:05 am, David Timms wrote: Audacity support when my users crash because they aren't running the recommended library (there is other locally adjusted libs which Audacity uses). Not that this is different from the past - but I would like it to oops, dropped word this is "no" different ! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 1:33 am, Fabio Valentini wrote: On Mon, Nov 11, 2019, 15:09 VÃt Ondruch <mailto:vondr...@redhat.com>> wrote: Dne 11. 11. 19 v 14:39 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > David Timms wrote: >> I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when >> it drops. > I would recommend against doing that (unless you can get it to build against > wxGTK 3.0 after all). Please wait until wxGTK 3.2 is actually stable and > available in Fedora. In the mean time, you can use Copr to provide updated wxGTK + Audacity. Keeping the resolution of possible conflicts on the users. VÃt I think the easiest solution would be to introduce a wxGTK "compat package" for 3.1, assuming it wouldn't conflict with the stable versions, and provide both the compat package and audacity builds based on it via COPR for testing. https://trac.wxwidgets.org/wiki/Roadmap Perhaps calling a compat package 3.2.0.develseries.3.1.3 etc would make sense to indicate to consumers that they are using what will soon (TM) become the main version. Dave. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 1:51 am, Scott Talbert wrote: On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, David Timms wrote: Issue: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). Hi, one of the wxGTK maintainers here. Where is the requirement to use wxGTK 3.1 documented? Like Kevin, I can't find that documented. And if it is definitely required, *why* is it required? I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when it drops. I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the following would make sense as a potential solution ?: $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 I would be strongly opposed to using a module for this. If you absolutely *must* have wx 3.1, we should just use a regular (non-modular) package. Note that we've already had one request for wx 3.1 [1], but I've been hesitant to package it since it has unstable API/ABI and we typically don't package development releases. Can you provide amplifying information on the wx 3.1 requirement from audacity first? See earlier, and I'm not sure how realistic this web analysis tool is... I don't think it's the same one I've used before: https://abi-laboratory.pro/index.php?view=timeline=wxwidgets Dave. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 2:36 am, Christopher Engelhard wrote: On 11/11/2019 3:51 PM, Scott Talbert wrote: > Hi, one of the wxGTK maintainers here. Where is the requirement to use > wxGTK 3.1 documented? Like Kevin, I can't find that documented. And if > it is definitely required, *why* is it required? Because it fixes many issues with the earlier version. On Archlinux audacity-git [1] builds against the default repo version of wxGTK, i.e. 3.0.4, so it does not seem to be required. It can in fact build against it - but then shows all the bugs that building against the old wxGTK entails. It means I can't get upstream Audacity support when my users crash because they aren't running the recommended library (there is other locally adjusted libs which Audacity uses). Not that this is different from the past - but I would like it to be. Cheers, Dave. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 12/11/19 12:39 am, Kevin Kofler wrote: David Timms wrote: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. see: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/Building_On_Linux or from the horse - (Mr Ed): https://github.com/audacity/audacity/blob/master/linux/build.txt " wxWidgets: 1) Clone wxWidgets and checkout 3.1.1 from the Audacity fork of the wxWidgets project: https://github.com/audacity/wxWidgets/ " I missed the fact that they build against their fork of wxWidgets from their own repo; I'm not sure whether it started as 3.1.1 or not. The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). Ewww! Why is nobody complaining to Audacity upstream about that (assuming that they really do require 3.1)? Requiring an unreleased/unstable wxGTK (I would not count a development release as "released") makes no sense whatsoever for a stable release of Audacity. Why are they not maintaining a stable branch based on a stable wxGTK release? They should. I found out yesterday, and that's why I'm trying to find most suitable way. I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when it drops. I would recommend against doing that (unless you can get it to build against wxGTK 3.0 after all). Please wait until wxGTK 3.2 is actually stable and available in Fedora. Well, ... it does build and run against 3.0.4, but lots of "already fixed" - in wxGTK - issues are present. I would prefer to follow Audacity teams requirements, as otherwise any issue reported in Fedora - I get the "did you build it like we said ?" response. I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the following would make sense as a potential solution ?: $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 Name Stream Profiles Summary wxGTK3 3.1.n-unstable default [d], devel GTK wxWidgets GUI library No, that would be a very bad idea, because it means Audacity would then conflict with all other wxGTK applications, or at least force them to run with the unstable wxGTK with which they were not tested (depending on whether wxGTK 3.1 is binary-backwards-compatible with 3.0 or not). But if my user's "must" have the latest Audacity, and don't care about any other WxGTK3 using software, shouldn't this be my user's choice to make ? It seems that modules would allow it. Modules are always the wrong solution for libraries because they are Isn't that exactly what the module examples are doing ? not parallel-installable. Agreed, I got that much from the reading I've done on modules. If the module was setup like this, then could the normal repo audacity.spec package: BuildRequires: wxGTK3:3.1.n-unstable/devel Requires: does this get sorted out magically like in a normal package ? No, building against a module does not work like that, it is more complicated. But a module is a bad idea anyway, see above. Where can I find information on using a module in another package ? As I'm not on the wxGTK3 package team, can I do this without their approval/assistance ? No, you definitely need to find a solution together with them. First step completed: Scott says he is on the wxGTK maintainers team, and thanks everyone for your responses so far. Dave ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On 11/11/2019 3:51 PM, Scott Talbert wrote: > Hi, one of the wxGTK maintainers here. Where is the requirement to use > wxGTK 3.1 documented? Like Kevin, I can't find that documented. And if > it is definitely required, *why* is it required? On Archlinux audacity-git [1] builds against the default repo version of wxGTK, i.e. 3.0.4, so it does not seem to be required. Christopher [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/audacity-git/ (ignore stated pkg version, package pulls master on install) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, David Timms wrote: Issue: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). Hi, one of the wxGTK maintainers here. Where is the requirement to use wxGTK 3.1 documented? Like Kevin, I can't find that documented. And if it is definitely required, *why* is it required? I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when it drops. I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the following would make sense as a potential solution ?: $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 I would be strongly opposed to using a module for this. If you absolutely *must* have wx 3.1, we should just use a regular (non-modular) package. Note that we've already had one request for wx 3.1 [1], but I've been hesitant to package it since it has unstable API/ABI and we typically don't package development releases. Can you provide amplifying information on the wx 3.1 requirement from audacity first? Thanks, Scott [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1714714 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019, 15:09 Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 11. 11. 19 v 14:39 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > > David Timms wrote: > >> Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. > > Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. > > > >> The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. > >> wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 > >> release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 > >> next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). > > Ewww! Why is nobody complaining to Audacity upstream about that > (assuming > > that they really do require 3.1)? Requiring an unreleased/unstable wxGTK > (I > > would not count a development release as "released") makes no sense > > whatsoever for a stable release of Audacity. Why are they not > maintaining a > > stable branch based on a stable wxGTK release? They should. > > > >> I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when > >> it drops. > > I would recommend against doing that (unless you can get it to build > against > > wxGTK 3.0 after all). Please wait until wxGTK 3.2 is actually stable and > > available in Fedora. > > > In the mean time, you can use Copr to provide updated wxGTK + Audacity. > Keeping the resolution of possible conflicts on the users. > > > Vít > I think the easiest solution would be to introduce a wxGTK "compat package" for 3.1, assuming it wouldn't conflict with the stable versions, and provide both the compat package and audacity builds based on it via COPR for testing. Fabio > > > > >> I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the > >> following would make sense as a potential solution ?: > >> > >> $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 > >> > >> Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 > >> Name Stream Profiles Summary > >> wxGTK3 3.1.n-unstable default [d], devel GTK wxWidgets GUI library > > No, that would be a very bad idea, because it means Audacity would then > > conflict with all other wxGTK applications, or at least force them to > run > > with the unstable wxGTK with which they were not tested (depending on > > whether wxGTK 3.1 is binary-backwards-compatible with 3.0 or not). > > > > Modules are always the wrong solution for libraries because they are not > > parallel-installable. > > > >> If the module was setup like this, then could the normal repo > >> audacity.spec package: > >> BuildRequires: wxGTK3:3.1.n-unstable/devel > >> > >> Requires: does this get sorted out magically like in a normal package ? > > No, building against a module does not work like that, it is more > > complicated. But a module is a bad idea anyway, see above. > > > >> As I'm not on the wxGTK3 package team, can I do this without their > >> approval/assistance ? > > No, you definitely need to find a solution together with them. > > > > Kevin Kofler > > ___ > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
Dne 11. 11. 19 v 14:39 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > David Timms wrote: >> Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. > Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. > >> The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. >> wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 >> release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 >> next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). > Ewww! Why is nobody complaining to Audacity upstream about that (assuming > that they really do require 3.1)? Requiring an unreleased/unstable wxGTK (I > would not count a development release as "released") makes no sense > whatsoever for a stable release of Audacity. Why are they not maintaining a > stable branch based on a stable wxGTK release? They should. > >> I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when >> it drops. > I would recommend against doing that (unless you can get it to build against > wxGTK 3.0 after all). Please wait until wxGTK 3.2 is actually stable and > available in Fedora. In the mean time, you can use Copr to provide updated wxGTK + Audacity. Keeping the resolution of possible conflicts on the users. Vít > >> I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the >> following would make sense as a potential solution ?: >> >> $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 >> >> Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 >> Name Stream Profiles Summary >> wxGTK3 3.1.n-unstable default [d], devel GTK wxWidgets GUI library > No, that would be a very bad idea, because it means Audacity would then > conflict with all other wxGTK applications, or at least force them to run > with the unstable wxGTK with which they were not tested (depending on > whether wxGTK 3.1 is binary-backwards-compatible with 3.0 or not). > > Modules are always the wrong solution for libraries because they are not > parallel-installable. > >> If the module was setup like this, then could the normal repo >> audacity.spec package: >> BuildRequires: wxGTK3:3.1.n-unstable/devel >> >> Requires: does this get sorted out magically like in a normal package ? > No, building against a module does not work like that, it is more > complicated. But a module is a bad idea anyway, see above. > >> As I'm not on the wxGTK3 package team, can I do this without their >> approval/assistance ? > No, you definitely need to find a solution together with them. > > Kevin Kofler > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
David Timms wrote: > Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. Does it really? I cannot find this requirement in their git repository. > The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. > wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 > release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 > next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). Ewww! Why is nobody complaining to Audacity upstream about that (assuming that they really do require 3.1)? Requiring an unreleased/unstable wxGTK (I would not count a development release as "released") makes no sense whatsoever for a stable release of Audacity. Why are they not maintaining a stable branch based on a stable wxGTK release? They should. > I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when > it drops. I would recommend against doing that (unless you can get it to build against wxGTK 3.0 after all). Please wait until wxGTK 3.2 is actually stable and available in Fedora. > I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the > following would make sense as a potential solution ?: > > $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 > > Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 > Name Stream Profiles Summary > wxGTK3 3.1.n-unstable default [d], devel GTK wxWidgets GUI library No, that would be a very bad idea, because it means Audacity would then conflict with all other wxGTK applications, or at least force them to run with the unstable wxGTK with which they were not tested (depending on whether wxGTK 3.1 is binary-backwards-compatible with 3.0 or not). Modules are always the wrong solution for libraries because they are not parallel-installable. > If the module was setup like this, then could the normal repo > audacity.spec package: > BuildRequires: wxGTK3:3.1.n-unstable/devel > > Requires: does this get sorted out magically like in a normal package ? No, building against a module does not work like that, it is more complicated. But a module is a bad idea anyway, see above. > As I'm not on the wxGTK3 package team, can I do this without their > approval/assistance ? No, you definitely need to find a solution together with them. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Potential module for wxGTK3.1 unstable series / Audacity
Issue: Audacity development (git) requires linking against wxGTK3.1. The normal Fedora wxGTK3 package is at wxGTK3-3.04 in F29/30/31/devel. wxGTK3.1 is a development series which eventually leads to wxGTK3.2 release. Upstream is currently at 3.1.3 and expecting at least a 3.1.4 next year. Audacity 2.3.3 release is imminent (RC02). I would like to be able to release the next Audacity (once tested) when it drops. I've been reading about Fedora modules, and am wondering whether the following would make sense as a potential solution ?: $ dnf modules list wxGTK3 Fedora Modular 30 - x86_64 Name Stream Profiles Summary wxGTK3 3.1.n-unstable default [d], devel GTK wxWidgets GUI library If the module was setup like this, then could the normal repo audacity.spec package: BuildRequires: wxGTK3:3.1.n-unstable/devel Requires: does this get sorted out magically like in a normal package ? I don't know whether any other wxGTK using packages could or should be using the wxGTK devel series. As I'm not on the wxGTK3 package team, can I do this without their approval/assistance ? Advice ? Am I on the right track ? Cheers, Dave. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Provenpackager help request: audacity
Since nobody replied in ~24h, I went ahead and pushed the green button ;) It's building now. Zbyszek On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 09:07:18AM -0400, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Vascom wrote: > > >I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not > >need %if...).Because for old releases it has separate branches. > > Yes, that's fine too. It appears, however, that the spec was being > maintained for epel and older fedoras, so I made the changes > compatible. > > Scott ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Provenpackager help request: audacity
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Vascom wrote: I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not need %if...).Because for old releases it has separate branches. Yes, that's fine too. It appears, however, that the spec was being maintained for epel and older fedoras, so I made the changes compatible. Scott___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Provenpackager help request: audacity
I am think for rawhide wxGTK3-devel can be simply removed from spec (not need %if...). Because for old releases it has separate branches. ср, 18 окт. 2017 г. в 3:31, Scott Talbert <s...@techie.net>: > The audacity package needs a small change and rebuild in rawhide after I > merged compat-wxGTK3-gtk2 into wxGTK3. Can someone please merge this PR > [1] (can provenpackagers merge arbitrary PR's on src.fedoraproject.org?), > or just commit this change and rebuild? > > Thanks > Scott > > [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity/pull-request/1 > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Provenpackager help request: audacity
The audacity package needs a small change and rebuild in rawhide after I merged compat-wxGTK3-gtk2 into wxGTK3. Can someone please merge this PR [1] (can provenpackagers merge arbitrary PR's on src.fedoraproject.org?), or just commit this change and rebuild? Thanks Scott [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity/pull-request/1 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:15:37AM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: It might be unrelated, but I've received broken dependency notifications for nginx the past two days. I've never been a maintainer or contributor to nginx. I did fork the repo in pagure, just to look at patching a bug in the epel7 branch. Is it possible that the recent re-syncing of the ACL's picked up that fork unintentionally? As far as I can see there is nothing linking you to rpms/nginx on pagure itself. Could you see if it happens again and forward me the email if so? Sure. And thanks. :) -- Todd ~~ Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:15:37AM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:44:27AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > I think I found the issue. Last week we finally migrated the ACLs > > > from pkgdb to pagure but it looks like the query I used to export > > > the ACLs from pkgdb wasn't restricted to active Fedora branch, so it > > > tooks the old branch as well which ended up for you with two > > > entries: > > > rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Approved > > > rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Obsolete > > > > > > The first line added you and the second one was ignored (I wasn't > > > going to migrate obsolete ACLs) so you can guess the outcome of that > > > :) > > > > Took a little more time than I thought but I believe this is all fixed > > now. Feel free to let us know if you think otherwise. > > It might be unrelated, but I've received broken dependency notifications for > nginx the past two days. I've never been a maintainer or contributor to > nginx. I did fork the repo in pagure, just to look at patching a bug in the > epel7 branch. Is it possible that the recent re-syncing of the ACL's picked > up that fork unintentionally? As far as I can see there is nothing linking you to rpms/nginx on pagure itself. Could you see if it happens again and forward me the email if so? Thanks, Pierre ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:44:27AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: I think I found the issue. Last week we finally migrated the ACLs from pkgdb to pagure but it looks like the query I used to export the ACLs from pkgdb wasn't restricted to active Fedora branch, so it tooks the old branch as well which ended up for you with two entries: rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Approved rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Obsolete The first line added you and the second one was ignored (I wasn't going to migrate obsolete ACLs) so you can guess the outcome of that :) Took a little more time than I thought but I believe this is all fixed now. Feel free to let us know if you think otherwise. It might be unrelated, but I've received broken dependency notifications for nginx the past two days. I've never been a maintainer or contributor to nginx. I did fork the repo in pagure, just to look at patching a bug in the epel7 branch. Is it possible that the recent re-syncing of the ACL's picked up that fork unintentionally? -- Todd ~~ It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile, but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face. -- Demotivators (www.despair.com) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:44:27AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:05:40AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 18:34:09 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > > I've not been a maintainer of the package since Fedora 13. > > > > > > > > I'm not listed as a maintainer in pkgdb, although there are three > > > > "Obsolete" entries that have been inherited for many years it seems. > > > > > > You are marked as an admin in: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity > > > but looking at pkgdb, I am indeed not quite able to say why that is. > > > > > > I'll try to find more information about this. > > > > Data migration bug. It's not only "audacity". Other ancient packages have > > been migrated from pkgdb incorrectly, too. > > I think I found the issue. > Last week we finally migrated the ACLs from pkgdb to pagure but it looks like > the query I used to export the ACLs from pkgdb wasn't restricted to active > Fedora branch, so it tooks the old branch as well which ended up for you with > two entries: > rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Approved > rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Obsolete > > The first line added you and the second one was ignored (I wasn't going to > migrate obsolete ACLs) so you can guess the outcome of that :) Took a little more time than I thought but I believe this is all fixed now. Feel free to let us know if you think otherwise. Thanks, Pierre ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:05:40AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 18:34:09 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > I've not been a maintainer of the package since Fedora 13. > > > > > > I'm not listed as a maintainer in pkgdb, although there are three > > > "Obsolete" entries that have been inherited for many years it seems. > > > > You are marked as an admin in: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity > > but looking at pkgdb, I am indeed not quite able to say why that is. > > > > I'll try to find more information about this. > > Data migration bug. It's not only "audacity". Other ancient packages have > been migrated from pkgdb incorrectly, too. I think I found the issue. Last week we finally migrated the ACLs from pkgdb to pagure but it looks like the query I used to export the ACLs from pkgdb wasn't restricted to active Fedora branch, so it tooks the old branch as well which ended up for you with two entries: rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Approved rpms,audacity,mschwendt,commit,Obsolete The first line added you and the second one was ignored (I wasn't going to migrate obsolete ACLs) so you can guess the outcome of that :) I fixed the query and now have the proper data/ACL list and the good news is that it seems that the diff between the two lists isn't that big so I should be able to correct the mistake this morning. Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for bringing this up :) Pierre ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 18:34:09 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > I've not been a maintainer of the package since Fedora 13. > > > > I'm not listed as a maintainer in pkgdb, although there are three > > "Obsolete" entries that have been inherited for many years it seems. > > You are marked as an admin in: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity > but looking at pkgdb, I am indeed not quite able to say why that is. > > I'll try to find more information about this. Data migration bug. It's not only "audacity". Other ancient packages have been migrated from pkgdb incorrectly, too. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Sun, Oct 08, 2017 at 05:01:03PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:58:56 + (UTC), buildsys fedoraproject org wrote: > > > audacity has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: > > On x86_64: > > audacity-2.1.3-6.fc28.x86_64 requires libwx_baseu-3.0-gtk2.so.0()(64bit) > -snip- > > Why do I get such an email? > I've not been a maintainer of the package since Fedora 13. > > I'm not listed as a maintainer in pkgdb, although there are three > "Obsolete" entries that have been inherited for many years it seems. You are marked as an admin in: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/audacity but looking at pkgdb, I am indeed not quite able to say why that is. I'll try to find more information about this. Pierre ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Sun, Oct 08, 2017 at 05:26:04PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Sun, 2017-10-08 at 17:01 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:58:56 + (UTC), buildsys fedoraproject org > > wrote: > > > > > audacity has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: > > > On x86_64: > > > audacity-2.1.3-6.fc28.x86_64 requires libwx_baseu-3.0- > > > gtk2.so.0()(64bit) > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1499117 That answers what's wromg with audacity, but not why unrelated people get mailed about this. -- Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality. xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl-- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Sun, 2017-10-08 at 17:01 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:58:56 + (UTC), buildsys fedoraproject org > wrote: > > > audacity has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: > > On x86_64: > > audacity-2.1.3-6.fc28.x86_64 requires libwx_baseu-3.0- > > gtk2.so.0()(64bit) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1499117 Best regards, -- Sérgio M. B. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Broken dependencies: audacity
On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:58:56 + (UTC), buildsys fedoraproject org wrote: > audacity has broken dependencies in the rawhide tree: > On x86_64: > audacity-2.1.3-6.fc28.x86_64 requires libwx_baseu-3.0-gtk2.so.0()(64bit) -snip- Why do I get such an email? I've not been a maintainer of the package since Fedora 13. I'm not listed as a maintainer in pkgdb, although there are three "Obsolete" entries that have been inherited for many years it seems. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 02:23 +, Sérgio Basto wrote: > I hope that will never be true, specially when we are comparing with > rawhide or a not final release, because if can't build in rawhide or > pre-alfa versions, it shouldn't make us stop to update a previous > version ... I was wrong, Kevin Fenzi pointed you to the right solution. :) Michael -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
Kevin Fenzi wrote: > or I suppose you could add an Epoch. Epoch would not help here. The Epoch would have to be bumped in Rawhide, where the package does not build at all, not even the old version. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
On Dom, 2016-03-06 at 15:52 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote: > > > > Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the > > push > > button) ? > Unfortunately no, as that would break upgrades to F24. You might be > stuck until that gets fixed. I hope that will never be true, specially when we are comparing with rawhide or a not final release, because if can't build in rawhide or pre-alfa versions, it shouldn't make us stop to update a previous version ... -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
Hi, On Seg, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote: > On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > > > upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23 > > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b > > -11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.log > Hi, I've received the above notification from the QA processes after > submitting a build. taskotron results are only informative, the package was pushed to stable , because had karma positive . > Background: > - new gcc has broken audacity build in future Fedora releases. So > can't > update F24/devel yet. > - new soundtouch in f23 has broken audacity there. The new build is > correct and works, but is newer than the uncompilable F24/devel for > the > moment. Sorry, I already wrote in bugzilla what happened, my mistake, hopefully it is fixed. Soundtouch in f23 stable, happens because we got 3 positive votes, very quickly and I coundn't rollback when I realize my mistake. Anyway I hope, now, all users have a better experience . And thanks David Timms, for take care of Audacity. -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
On Mon, 7 Mar 2016 08:14:47 +1100 David Timms <dti...@iinet.net.au> wrote: > On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > > upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23 > > > > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b-11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.log > > > > Hi, I've received the above notification from the QA processes after > submitting a build. > > Background: > - new gcc has broken audacity build in future Fedora releases. So > can't update F24/devel yet. > - new soundtouch in f23 has broken audacity there. The new build is > correct and works, but is newer than the uncompilable F24/devel for > the moment. > > Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the > push button) ? Sadly this update is already pushed to stable, but next time: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches or I suppose you could add an Epoch. I'd only suggest that if you are unable to fix f24/rawhide in a timely manner. kevin pgpyth9o0NRZg.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 08:14 +1100, David Timms wrote: > Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the > push > button) ? Unfortunately no, as that would break upgrades to F24. You might be stuck until that gets fixed. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23
On 05/03/16 13:37, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > upgradepath FAILED for audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23 > > https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/119e1b68-e27b-11e5-a932-525400120b80/task_output/audacity-2.1.2-3.fc23.log Hi, I've received the above notification from the QA processes after submitting a build. Background: - new gcc has broken audacity build in future Fedora releases. So can't update F24/devel yet. - new soundtouch in f23 has broken audacity there. The new build is correct and works, but is newer than the uncompilable F24/devel for the moment. Can I ignore that an push the build anyway for F23 (I can't see the push button) ? Cheers, Dave. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
wxGTK3 - drop down fields - text misplaced (Audacity)
Hi any GTk3 or WxWidgets devs, In Audacity (next), upstream has moved to wxGTK3. The only visible issue I can see is with the placement of text within drop down fields. The text is too low, and if it's too wide, the combo box isn't resizing to fit the width. [1] Just wondered if this is a problem with any other wxGTK3 using applications, or any pointers in trying to nut out the cause would be welcome ? [1] <http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/audacity-freeworld/gtk3-screenshots/> contains 3 screen shots indicating the issue, where it's difficult to read the text. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: wxGTK3 - drop down fields - text misplaced (Audacity)
On Mon, 23 Nov 2015, David Timms wrote: Hi any GTk3 or WxWidgets devs, In Audacity (next), upstream has moved to wxGTK3. The only visible issue I can see is with the placement of text within drop down fields. The text is too low, and if it's too wide, the combo box isn't resizing to fit the width. [1] Just wondered if this is a problem with any other wxGTK3 using applications, or any pointers in trying to nut out the cause would be welcome ? [1] <http://members.iinet.net.au/~timmsy/audacity-freeworld/gtk3-screenshots/> contains 3 screen shots indicating the issue, where it's difficult to read the text. When updating my code for wxGTK3, there were some places where I had to add a Layout() call to my wxPanel after adding items to a wxChoice in order to get it to size correctly. The same code worked just fine with GTK2, so I'm not sure whether I really should have had a Layout() call there in the first place. Scott -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: wxGTK3 - drop down fields - text misplaced (Audacity)
On 24/11/15 01:29, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Mon, 23 Nov 2015, David Timms wrote: > > When updating my code for wxGTK3, there were some places where I had to > add a Layout() call to my wxPanel after adding items to a wxChoice in > order to get it to size correctly. The same code worked just fine with > GTK2, so I'm not sure whether I really should have had a Layout() call > there in the first place. OK, that sounds like a great place to start... now to find that point in the app source haystack. Thanks. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
[EPEL-devel] Test request for Audacity audio editor on EPEL-7
Hi, I would welcome any feedback about the epel-7 updates-testing candidate for Audacity 2.1.1. It's available from the [Builds] link at: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-7245/audacity-2.1.1-1.el7 If you can, thanks for your testing :-) ___ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 19:55 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. Mind you, Most of these patents are finally expiring, and the existing court cases have been oddm and usually settled out of court. But there's nothing in those licenses that protects you from the existing patent claims of Alcatel-Lucent, or of Texas MP3 Technologies, or those of a Japanese electronics firm I used to work for. (Ask privately if curious.) One: you, drago01 and Frank are not in fact disagreeing. When drago01 wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. he was saying more or less what you are. There are F/OSS MP3 decoders. There are MP3 decoders with patent licenses. But there is no F/OSS MP3 decoder with a patent license. Fluendo's decoder is an example of a non-F/OSS decoder which has a patent license. mgp123 is an example of a F/OSS decoder which has no patent license. RPM Fusion can include either type of decoder (though I think in practice it includes only the 'F/OSS but not patent licensed' type), but Fedora can include neither. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 03:47:55PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:40 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. They do have a valid patent license (other example is Google). It Which they? The fluendo licensing, from reviewing their printed license, refers to MIT software licenses. The MIT softwae licenses do not cover patents held by 3rd parties. Did you even read linked page? Especially paragraphs with MP3 and patents and The fully licensed binary GStreamer plug-in headings? Reading it in even more in detail, I can only say ick. They can't publish source for it, only binaries for countries with softwae patents. The MP3 license is quite orthogonal to the MIT licensing they speak of.. OK, you've managed to get *one* working license, but it's binary only, not a valid source license in countries with valid patents. That's a big improvement over a few years ago, I'll concede. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:40 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. They do have a valid patent license (other example is Google). It Which they? Fluendo S.A i.e the company. The fluendo licensing, from reviewing their printed license, refers to MIT software licenses. The MIT softwae licenses do not cover patents held by 3rd parties. You are mixing copyright and patent law. If you download the code and compile it you don't have a license. The binaries shipped by fluendo are proper licensed though. Nero licensing is another story, I'll admit. The restrictions on MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 use, declared at http://www.nero.com/enu/end-user-agreement.html, are fascinating: I assume that Nero has made a vaguely successful commercial agreeement for the licenses. But that's the first remotely valid license I've seen for Linux use of MPEG under USA patent reestrictions. Google Chrome? Adobe Flash? Android ? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
Hi, On 04/30/2013 10:27 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: New packages for soxr have been requested for updates-testing for 18 and 19. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958132 That should help Hans if he chooses to update audacity to the latest version. Thanks! Regards, Hans -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
Hi, On 04/29/2013 05:55 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: audacity is unmaintained in both fedora and RPM Fusion. I'm about to kick it out of the later repository. This is not true for at least Fedora, I've pingened the maintainer (David Timms) about the 2.0.3 update in bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=951001 And David's response was: Been busy then awol for a month, so just getting settled back in I've offered David to help with taking care of the 2.0.3 update, so that should be done soon, either by him or by me. Regards, Hans -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. They do have a valid patent license (other example is Google). It isn't impossible to get a patent license for the linux plattform. Having a redistribute able one (so that you can ship open source software) is where the problems are. Even if fedora could get a license (via red hat) it would not apply for people that redistribute it hence it would be non free. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:50 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingswo...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote: I just packaged soxr... Anyone willing to review if I submit a review request? Since nobody else jumped up, I'll take it. I probably won't have time to review it until Wednesday, so take your time. :-) Review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958132 fedora-review output: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34775202/soxr/review.txt Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:40 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. They do have a valid patent license (other example is Google). It Which they? The fluendo licensing, from reviewing their printed license, refers to MIT software licenses. The MIT softwae licenses do not cover patents held by 3rd parties. Nero licensing is another story, I'll admit. The restrictions on MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 use, declared at http://www.nero.com/enu/end-user-agreement.html, are fascinating: I assume that Nero has made a vaguely successful commercial agreeement for the licenses. But that's the first remotely valid license I've seen for Linux use of MPEG under USA patent reestrictions. isn't impossible to get a patent license for the linux plattform. Having a redistribute able one (so that you can ship open source software) is where the problems are. Even if fedora could get a license (via red hat) it would not apply for people that redistribute it hence it would be non free. And would not be open, either. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 03:47:55PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:40 AM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. They do have a valid patent license (other example is Google). It Which they? The fluendo licensing, from reviewing their printed license, refers to MIT software licenses. The MIT softwae licenses do not cover patents held by 3rd parties. Did you even read linked page? Especially paragraphs with MP3 and patents and The fully licensed binary GStreamer plug-in headings? -- Tomasz TorczOnly gods can safely risk perfection, xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl it's a dangerous thing for a man. -- Alia -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
New packages for soxr have been requested for updates-testing for 18 and 19. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958132 That should help Hans if he chooses to update audacity to the latest version. Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 07:09 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? please move this question to rpmfusion Maling lists ... -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 10:28 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? I think what you're looking for is the audacity-freeworld add-on package from RPM Fusion, probably best to inquire there, although I think it was on the FTBFS list for F19, but you may be OK for F18. it is also FTBFS on F18 , but compiles if we use --without-ffmpeg like I wrote I'd like continue in rpmfusion Maling List ... please Thanks -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:35:12 +0100 Sérgio Basto ser...@serjux.com wrote: On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 10:28 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? I think what you're looking for is the audacity-freeworld add-on package from RPM Fusion, probably best to inquire there, although I think it was on the FTBFS list for F19, but you may be OK for F18. it is also FTBFS on F18 , but compiles if we use --without-ffmpeg like I wrote I'd like continue in rpmfusion Maling List ... Hello, Everyone I had been having a similar problem building Audacity on Fedora 18. Following this advice: Audacity does not yet support building against later than FFmpeg 0.7 or 0.8. So if the system FFmpeg is 1.0.5 you will need to self-compile FFmpeg 0.7 or 0.8 then link Audacity against that. I have been able to successfully build Audacity from SVN on Fedora 18 WITH mp3 support. Here is the entire email I received from the Audacity mailing list: From: g...@audacityteam.org To: Discussion list for Audacity users audacity-us...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Audacity-users] Can't build Audacity from SVN on Fedora 18 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:12:18 +0100 Reply-To: audacity-us...@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.64.06 [en] (Unregistered) Hi Steven, Audacity does not yet support building against later than FFmpeg 0.7 or 0.8. So if the system FFmpeg is 1.0.5 you will need to self-compile FFmpeg 0.7 or 0.8 then link Audacity against that. Alternatively I think if you configure Audacity --without-ffmpeg to enable it to build you should still be able to export to FFmpeg formats using the Audacity command-line exporter. To do this, choose (external program) when you export then point Audacity to the appropriate .so file: http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/exporting_to_an_external_program.html . Command-line export supports any version of FFmpeg. Gale -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Ter, 2013-04-30 at 18:18 -0500, Steven P. Ulrick wrote: On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:35:12 +0100 Sérgio Basto ser...@serjux.com wrote: On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 10:28 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? I think what you're looking for is the audacity-freeworld add-on package from RPM Fusion, probably best to inquire there, although I think it was on the FTBFS list for F19, but you may be OK for F18. it is also FTBFS on F18 , but compiles if we use --without-ffmpeg like I wrote I'd like continue in rpmfusion Maling List ... Hello, Everyone I had been having a similar problem building Audacity on Fedora 18. Solutions here https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2707 -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
audacity is unmaintained in both fedora and RPM Fusion. I'm about to kick it out of the later repository. Nicolas (kwizart) 2013/4/28 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Nicolas Chauvet kwiz...@gmail.com wrote: audacity is unmaintained in both fedora and RPM Fusion. That's doesn't appear to be true. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/audacity Now, if the maintainer isn't being responsive, we have other ways to deal with that. -J I'm about to kick it out of the later repository. Nicolas (kwizart) 2013/4/28 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/ in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Nicolas Chauvet kwiz...@gmail.comwrote: audacity is unmaintained in both fedora and RPM Fusion. That's doesn't appear to be true. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/audacity Now, if the maintainer isn't being responsive, we have other ways to deal with that. If they are non-responsive I was considering volunteering to take the packages, not that I need any more, but I do occasionally use audacity. The latest upstream version is 2.0.3 and uses a new resampling library by default, libsoxr[1], which does not appear to be in Fedora yet. Richard [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/soxr/wiki/Home/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
I still have it on my system and use it, what else is there to use? Thanks, Phillip Lynn On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 17:55 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: audacity is unmaintained in both fedora and RPM Fusion. I'm about to kick it out of the later repository. Nicolas (kwizart) 2013/4/28 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
I just packaged soxr... Anyone willing to review if I submit a review request? Thanks, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:23 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: MP3 is patented, and there are *no* licenses available for Linux environments. This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php -- Regards, Frank www.frankly3d.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:20:30 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. Name 2. http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/ http://www.nero.com/enu/downloads-linux4-update.php Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. Mind you, Most of these patents are finally expiring, and the existing court cases have been oddm and usually settled out of court. But there's nothing in those licenses that protects you from the existing patent claims of Alcatel-Lucent, or of Texas MP3 Technologies, or those of a Japanese electronics firm I used to work for. (Ask privately if curious.) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: Neither of which address the existing MP3 patent issues, only software copyright issues. Mind you, Most of these patents are finally expiring, and the existing court cases have been oddm and usually settled out of court. But there's nothing in those licenses that protects you from the existing patent claims of Alcatel-Lucent, or of Texas MP3 Technologies, or those of a Japanese electronics firm I used to work for. (Ask privately if curious.) https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2012-May/001904.html We'll revisit decoding in late 2015, barring sanity in US patent law spontaneously appearing (or the Mayan apocalypse rendering the issue irrelevant). Since the Mayan apocalypse did not render the issue irrelevant (and that was clearly the more plausible of the two posited scenarios), we'll have to wait until 2015. -T.C. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 07:09 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? What do you mean with Audacity mp3 build is broken , rpmfusion build are working , I think. At least is working Installed Packages audacious.x86_643.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-devel.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-libs.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugin-fc.x86_64 0.6-19.fc18installed audacious-plugin-xmp.x86_64 3.4.0-12.fc18 installed audacious-plugins.x86_643.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugins-amidi.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugins-freeworld.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-aac.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-ffaudio.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-mms.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-mp3.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-jack.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On 04/30/2013 03:07 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Dom, 2013-04-28 at 07:09 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? What do you mean with Audacity mp3 build is broken , rpmfusion build are working , I think. At least is working Installed Packages audacious.x86_643.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-devel.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-libs.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugin-fc.x86_64 0.6-19.fc18installed audacious-plugin-xmp.x86_64 3.4.0-12.fc18 installed audacious-plugins.x86_643.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugins-amidi.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates audacious-plugins-freeworld.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-aac.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-ffaudio.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-mms.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-freeworld-mp3.x86_64 3.3.4-1.fc18 @rpmfusion-free-updates-testing audacious-plugins-jack.x86_64 3.3.4-2.fc18 @updates Thats audacious rather than audacity -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On 04/29/2013 08:39 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: I just packaged soxr... Anyone willing to review if I submit a review request? Thanks, Richard Sure. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote: I just packaged soxr... Anyone willing to review if I submit a review request? Since nobody else jumped up, I'll take it. I probably won't have time to review it until Wednesday, so take your time. :-) BTW, it looks like Hans de Goede has started the unresponive maintainer process. -T.C. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
audacity
For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 07:09:30 -0700 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? Important or otherwise, Fedora don't build in mp3 support ootb You need to travel another road. -- Regards, Frank www.frankly3d.com -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Apr 28, 2013 7:21 AM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 07:09:30 -0700 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? Important or otherwise, Fedora don't build in mp3 support ootb You need to travel another road. -- Regards, Frank www.frankly3d.com -- Thanks Frank, I thought we did, acknowledging that we are a loose group of developers throughout the globe. Is there a bit of code that I could possibly write in? or Should I just go bother them? Thanks again, Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? I think what you're looking for is the audacity-freeworld add-on package from RPM Fusion, probably best to inquire there, although I think it was on the FTBFS list for F19, but you may be OK for F18. Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
Please report that to RPMFusion. Not here. As have said before, Fedora does not support mp3 files because is not free and some countries could be prohibed by law. Please contact with RPMfusion people. Greetings! El 28/04/2013 16:28, Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com escribió: On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? I think what you're looking for is the audacity-freeworld add-on package from RPM Fusion, probably best to inquire there, although I think it was on the FTBFS list for F19, but you may be OK for F18. Richard -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
Am 28.04.2013 16:50, schrieb Richard Vickery: On Apr 28, 2013 7:21 AM, Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com mailto:frankl...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 07:09:30 -0700 Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com mailto:richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? Important or otherwise, Fedora don't build in mp3 support ootb You need to travel another road. I thought we did, acknowledging that we are a loose group of developers throughout the globe. Is there a bit of code that I could possibly write in? or Should I just go bother them? besides the fact that it is pretty clear that MP3 is not supported by a US distribution and this belongs to the users-list you find such packages always in the rpmfusion-repos [harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ rpm -qa | grep audacity audacity-freeworld-2.0.0-1.fc18.x86_64 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: For F18, it appears that the Audacity mp3 build is broken - it won't install - and mp3 support is rather important to me; is it possible to get this particular build working? MP3 players, and the DVD library libdvdcss, represent legal problems for US developers. MP3 is patented, and there are *no* licenses available for Linux environments. libdvdcss runs into the protection of digital rights software in the DMCA, and has even nastier legal protections on it for US developers. The result is that there are worldwide software repositories such as rpmfusion for MP3, MP4, and a lot of other really useful software, and freshrpms for the libdvdcss that are publicly available. *BUT* you need it to be legal in the country you're downloading *to* to be able to use them without threat of prosecution. There's also the Penguin Liberation Front for a few components with weird licensing that others haven't been able to resolve usable licenses for. In order to use MP3 legally, I'm assuming you're in a country without that bane of development everywhere, software patents, and can legally use http://rpmfusion.org/. If so, enjoy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
Le dimanche 28 avril 2013 à 13:08 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia a écrit : There's also the Penguin Liberation Front for a few components with weird licensing that others haven't been able to resolve usable licenses for. PLF closed a few weeks ago[1], and was for Mandriva. [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/plf-discuss@zarb.org/msg01913.html -- Michael Scherer -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: audacity
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote: MP3 is patented, and there are *no* licenses available for Linux environments. This is nonsense. There are enough licenses for the linux environment. A lot of vendors have licensed MP3 en/decoders that work on the linux. The point is that there is no licensed open source mp3 en/decoder. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Audacity - audio editor - test request
Hi David:
Have you received an indication from anyone to do this? I would like to
help test it; how am I to get it off the site using Google-Chrome?
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:58 AM, David Timms dti...@iinet.net.au wrote:
Hi, It appears Audacity is getting close to v2 release (it's been in 1.3
beta mode for a few years).
I've built the current svn release as 2.0.0.alpha... , and request anyone
with audio hardware who would like to help to download and install it to
check whichever functions you feel like testing operate as expected.
build: {rawhide}, also runs on F16 OK.
i686:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/**koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771416http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771416
x86_64:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/**koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771415http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771415
Any crash/exceptions definitely report in bugzilla.
Cheers, David Timms.
ps. An ffmpeg mp3 version should be ready @RPM Fusion in a few days.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/develhttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Audacity - audio editor - test request
On 18/02/12 09:46, Richard Vickery wrote: Have you received an indication from anyone to do this? No, actually. Although I thought I sent it to the test list but see now I sent to devel. I would like to help test it; how am I to get it off the site using Google-Chrome? Looks like I built a scratch build, and the results have expired. Since there has been more changes, I'll update and rebuild later today. (I'll also send to test list instead.) Cheers. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Audacity - audio editor - test request
Hi, It appears Audacity is getting close to v2 release (it's been in 1.3
beta mode for a few years).
I've built the current svn release as 2.0.0.alpha... , and request
anyone with audio hardware who would like to help to download and
install it to check whichever functions you feel like testing operate as
expected.
build: {rawhide}, also runs on F16 OK.
i686:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771416
x86_64:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771415
Any crash/exceptions definitely report in bugzilla.
Cheers, David Timms.
ps. An ffmpeg mp3 version should be ready @RPM Fusion in a few days.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
