Processed: Re: Bug#594636: general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> severity 594636 minor
Bug #594636 {Done: Mehdi Dogguy } [vlc] general: 
vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)
Severity set to 'minor' from 'serious'

> tag 594636 - patch
Bug #594636 {Done: Mehdi Dogguy } [vlc] general: 
vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)
Removed tag(s) patch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
594636: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=594636
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

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

Bug#594636: general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)

[Neil Williams]

severity 594636 minor
tag 594636 - patch
thanks

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 23:09:26 +0200
hoareau jean pierre  wrote:

> Package: general
> Severity: serious
> Tags: patch
> Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in
> the past)

It appears that you are trying to build the debian package from the
wrong version of VLC 

> debian source pkg "vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2" .

> dpkg-source: info: construction de vlc dans vlc_1.0.0-git-1.tar.gz

i.e. the debian packaging is for a different version of the upstream.

You've got the upstream tarball for 1.1.2 but you've matched that with
the Debian packaging for 1.0.0-git-1. It's not surprising that the
patches don't work.

As advised by Medhi in the bug report, if you try to build 1.1.3 in
both versions it works.

dget will download the orig.tar.bz2 as well as the Debian packaging and
will always ensure that the version of the packaging precisely matches
the version of the upstream it was intended to build.

Lowering the severity of this bug to stop it interfering with the
release, I'll let the VLC maintainers close it if they agree that the
original "steps to reproduce" showed an invalid build method. (The
patch tag is meant to be used when you have supplied a patch that fixes
the problem, not when the problem itself is due to an existing patch not
working.)

> Same problem with vlc_1.1.3.ori.tar.bz2

Match vla_1.1.3.orig.tar.bz2 with the Debian packaging *for* version
1.1.3-1 (as Mehdi detailed in this comment), and it builds fine.

If there remain issues with how 1.1.3-1 operates once it is built,
please explain in a reply to the bug report.

-- 


Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/



pgpxtLEpZept5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Alexandre Quessy]

Hello!

2010/8/27 Felipe Sateler :
> On 26/08/10 14:39, Roman Haefeli wrote:
>> I think I don't. My username on alioth is rdz-guest.
>
> Now you do. Welcome to the team!
>

This is good news, Roman!
Keep the good work!

-- 
Alexandre Quessy
http://alexandre.quessy.net/

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

Re: Hints on packaging a library

[Alexandre Quessy]

Thanks everyone for your insights!
I think I will play with the autotools, libtool and the like a bit to
get a better understanding of what can be possible with the Debian
tools.

2010/8/26 Jonas Smedegaard :
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:31:43AM -0400, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
>> The packages I am working and contain libraries on are: scenic,
>> spinframework. I am also interested in packaging lyd.
>
> Lyd? What is that? It is the danish (and norwegian) word for sound, but I
> never heard of it being a code project.

http://pippin.gimp.org/lyd/

It doesn't have any release yet, though. It's still in its early
stage. It can already play sounds and apply effects on them with a
nice script-like interface.

-- 
Alexandre Quessy
http://alexandre.quessy.net/

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

Csound on Ubuntu

[Felipe Sateler]

I think csound on Ubuntu is broken. In particular, the patch for
supporting multiple python versions is _very_ wrong, it just copies the
modules built for one version of python to all python supported versions.
Alessio, please revert that patch. It is the only (meaningful)
divergence from debian's csound.

also, debian/copyright_hints is listed in include_binaries (?).

-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

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

Re: pd-zexy compilation improvements

[Felipe Sateler]

On 27/08/10 18:18, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 12:11 +0200, IOhannes zmölnig wrote:
>> On 08/24/2010 12:55 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 09:25:12AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm. Do we then perhaps need to beware of this for helper tools like
>>> lintian and dh_shlibdeps?
>>>
> 
>> the other point is of course, whether tools like dh_shlibdeps and
>> dh_strip work correctly.
>> i can only say from experience, that they do.
>> e.g. the binary Gem.pd_linux in the package "gem" is correctly stripped
>> and the package depends on all packages that provide libraries the
>> binary has been dynamically linked to.
>> debian/rules does not extra care of shlibs.
>> so it seems to "just work"
> 
> It seems it's not dh_strip who does the stripping. In the case of the
> gem package it seems to happen already at compile time. After putting an
> unstripped Gem.pd_linux in the temporary directory running dh_strip
> won't touch it all. 

dh_strip doesn't strip anything it doesn't recognize (and it has no way
of being forced into it). Add comments to bug #468333 to ask for support
for this.

In the meantime, you can call

strip --remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note --strip-unneeded

on each of the pd_linux files.

> 
> Also it seems as if dh_shlibdeps looks only for .so-files. I haven't
> figured out what trickery was used in the gem package to let it find
> also .pd_linux-files. But having a plain .pd-linux file in the temporary
> directory and running dh_shlibdeps doesn't produce anything useful.

You can pass additional arguments for dh_shlibdeps to process:

dh_shlibdeps -- $file1 $file2

-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

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

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Felipe Sateler]

On 26/08/10 14:39, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 14:22 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> 
>> When that's done, you have write access to our Git area at Alioth: then 
>> please upload your packaging there and let us[1] look at it together.
> 
> Thanks for your help. Am I supposed to have already access to
> git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia?
> 
> I think I don't. My username on alioth is rdz-guest. 
> 

Now you do. Welcome to the team!

-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

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

Re: Hints on packaging a library

[Felipe Sateler]

On 26/08/10 12:15, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 17:31:43 (CEST), Alexandre Quessy wrote:
> 
>> There is no debian/shlibs file in the Git repo for the packaging of
>> liblo. I guess it's generated by the debian/rules file?
> 
> yes, see the manpage of dh_makeshlibs. The file is generally created
> during runtime of debian/rules, but policy does not require that dynamics.

Note that if you provide a symbols file, the shlibs file is redundant
(see dpkg-shlibdeps(1)).

-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

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

Re: pd-zexy compilation improvements

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:11:16PM +0200, IOhannes zmölnig wrote:

On 08/24/2010 12:55 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 09:25:12AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:


Hmm. Do we then perhaps need to beware of this for helper tools like 
lintian and dh_shlibdeps?


I actually do not think that dh_shlibdeps has any role here, just 
mentioning it as an example: For Debian packaging we have a bunch of 
helper tools used either directly during packaging or during various 
tests and inspections, which rely on e.g. shared libraries ending in 
.so and located below /usr/lib.  When then unusual things are done, 
we might want to add hints for such tools to not hide potential 
problems from them.


Or expressed differently: Even if PureData works splendid with its 
unusual naming, we still might benefit in Debian (and derivatives) 
from using the classic .so extension if indeed it is technically the 
same.



i think there is no issue here at all.
we are talking about "modules" (binaries that can be dlopen()ed).

dlopen()ed modules are technically quite the same as shlibs (meaning, 
the way they are built), but are used in a different way, that makes 
issues such as installation path and/or rpath irrelevant (at least, as 
far as i understand it)


so from this perspective, we don't have to care about the extension.
(i guess this came from my confusing use of "shared library"; sorry for
that; anyhow, debian-policy is quite clear that "modules" need not have
an .so extension)

the other point is of course, whether tools like dh_shlibdeps and
dh_strip work correctly.
i can only say from experience, that they do.
e.g. the binary Gem.pd_linux in the package "gem" is correctly stripped
and the package depends on all packages that provide libraries the
binary has been dynamically linked to.
debian/rules does not extra care of shlibs.
so it seems to "just work"

i think that changing the default extension of pd-plugins only in
Debian, will make things unnecessary complicated, as it would require to
patch the module-loader of puredata as well as practically every single
build system for externals, only to find ourselves deviant from and
incompatible with virtually any other puredata distribution.

to sum up, i don't think the gain would outweigh the cost.
(esp. since there is currently no real gain, as  adhere to the
debian-policy and all tools work as expected)



Thanks for the long explanation.  I am thrilled to be around such 
knowledgeable folks here!



 - Jonas

--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 09:12:32PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

On 2010-08-12 19:33, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the 
gmerlin-avdecoder package?  The folders in question are:


lib/libwin32dll
lib/GSM610



regarding the lib/GSM610 folder, on the gmerlin list people don't see 
why it shouldn't be compatible with GPL:


Agreed.  I must confess that I blindly stripped without verifying - at 
the time I thought that my action was to demonstrate _how_ to elegantly 
strip from source, and then let Hans-Christoph document _why_.


...but I never communicated that :-(

The GSM code is the same as already shipped as a shared library in 
libgsm1, so indeed it is safe to include with source, but we should not 
use it but instead link against that shared library.



Regards,

 - Jonas

--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: pd-zexy compilation improvements

[Roman Haefeli]

On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 12:11 +0200, IOhannes zmölnig wrote:
> On 08/24/2010 12:55 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 09:25:12AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> 
> > Hmm. Do we then perhaps need to beware of this for helper tools like
> > lintian and dh_shlibdeps?
> > 

> the other point is of course, whether tools like dh_shlibdeps and
> dh_strip work correctly.
> i can only say from experience, that they do.
> e.g. the binary Gem.pd_linux in the package "gem" is correctly stripped
> and the package depends on all packages that provide libraries the
> binary has been dynamically linked to.
> debian/rules does not extra care of shlibs.
> so it seems to "just work"

It seems it's not dh_strip who does the stripping. In the case of the
gem package it seems to happen already at compile time. After putting an
unstripped Gem.pd_linux in the temporary directory running dh_strip
won't touch it all. 

Also it seems as if dh_shlibdeps looks only for .so-files. I haven't
figured out what trickery was used in the gem package to let it find
also .pd_linux-files. But having a plain .pd-linux file in the temporary
directory and running dh_shlibdeps doesn't produce anything useful.

Roman


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

Bug#591881: vlc-nox: package fails to upgrade properly from lenny

[Reinhard Tartler]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 17:29:43 (CEST), David Kalnischkies wrote:

> 2010/8/26 Reinhard Tartler :
>> I'm still waiting for an answer on this question. Is this issue solved
>> with the latest upload, or do you prefer me to upload the patch posted
>> above?
>
> It would be nice if you could fix it in your package
> (which at least feels a bit cleaner anyway: liba2 breaks liba1
> sounds saner than libpartlyunrelated breaks liba1).

After preparing an upload for this, I've tried to reproduce this issue
myself in a virtual machine. The thing is, I've not been able to
reproduce this neither with lenny's apt, nor squeeze's apt (0.7.25.3)
nor sid's (0.8.0) apt.

What I've did was:

 - do a basic lenny installation
 - apt-get install install ffmpeg
 - sed -i s,lenny,sid,g /etc/apt/sources.list
 - apt-get update -qq
 - apt-get install ffmpeg

AFAIUI the bugreport, this should trigger this bug, however, I fail to
reproduce it. I've also tried with vlc and vlc-nox, but this worked just
fine as well.

Lucas, could you please assist me here how to reproduce this bug?

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4



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

Bug#594636: marked as done (general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary))

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 27 Aug 2010 23:37:04 +0200
with message-id <4c783000.7040...@dogguy.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#594636: general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make 
the .deb packages (source and binary)
has caused the Debian Bug report #594636,
regarding general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages 
(source and binary)
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
594636: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=594636
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: general
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)

soleil:/usr/src# uname -a
Linux soleil 2.6.32-3-ieee1394 #1 SMP Mon Jun 7 13:44:44 CEST 2010 i686
GNU/Linux
I run DEBIAN squeeze updated this week.

Steps to reproduce: after loading all dependency according to the debian source
pkg "vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2" .
1) Extrac the VLC source in /usr/src (i get a directory named vlc-1.1.2)
2)configure : # ./configure --enable-run-as-root : résult ok.
3)Compile using make or ./compile : result ok
4) Launch vlc from the current directory as well:#./vlc result OK (work find)

5) Try to make the .deb file as describe in "building package" "DEBIAN"
To build a Debian package, you need to get the packaging info
svn co svn://svn.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/videolan/vlc/debian debian (ok)
and then
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc (fail)

the results are :
dpkg-source: info: utilisation du format source « 1.0 »
dpkg-source: info: construction de vlc dans vlc_1.0.0-git-1.tar.gz
dpkg-source: info: construction de vlc dans vlc_1.0.0-git-1.dsc
QUILT_PATCHES=debian/patches \
quilt --quiltrc /dev/null push -a || test $? = 2
Application de 052_as-needed.diff
patching file autotools/ltmain.sh
Hunk #1 succeeded at 4716 with fuzz 2 (offset 2909 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 5075 (offset 2920 lines).

Application de 101_certificates_paths.diff
patching file modules/misc/gnutls.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 699 (offset 11 lines).

Application de 102_dejavu_font.diff
patching file modules/misc/freetype.c
Hunk #1 succeeded at 67 with fuzz 2 (offset 6 lines).

Application de 104_notify.diff
patching file modules/misc/notify/notify.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 216.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- rejects in file modules/misc/notify/notify.c
Le patch 104_notify.diff ne s'applique pas proprement (forcez l'application
avec -f)

It seem to be a bug in the patch file 104_notify.diff, and I am unable to solve
it.
Note that the LOCALE LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8 is not apply, vlc remain in english.

Could you please note this problem ?

Same problem with vlc_1.1.3.ori.tar.bz2

Best regards
Hoareau Jean Pierre



-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers testing-proposed-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-3-ieee1394 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Index: vlc-0.9.1/modules/misc/notify/notify.c
===
--- vlc-0.9.1.orig/modules/misc/notify/notify.c	2008-08-25 23:40:43.0 +0200
+++ vlc-0.9.1/modules/misc/notify/notify.c	2008-09-04 00:46:24.0 +0200
@@ -216,13 +216,7 @@
 free( psz_arturl );
 }
 else /* else we show state-of-the art logo */
-{
-const char *data_path = config_GetDataDir ();
-char buf[strlen (data_path) + sizeof ("/vlc48x48.png")];
-
-snprintf (buf, sizeof (buf), "%s/vlc48x48.png", data_path);
-pix = gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file( buf, &p_error );
-}
+pix = gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file( "/usr/share/pixmaps/vlc.png", &p_error );
 
 /* we need to replace '&' with '&' because '&' is a keyword of
  * notification-daemon parser */
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 08/27/2010 11:09 PM, hoareau jean pierre wrote:
> 
> It seem to be a bug in the patch file 104_notify.diff, and I am 
> unable to solve it. Note that the LOCALE LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8 is not 
> apply, vlc remain in english.
> 

There is no problem in 104_notify.diff afaik and vlc was successfully
built on all our autobuilders without any problem, as you can see on:

https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=vlc

If you want to compile vlc (or any other package) the debian way, then:
1) dget http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/vlc_1.1.3-1.dsc
   (This way you're sure you have downloaded what the maintainer put in
the archive. Sometimes, the .orig is not exactly

Re: Bug#594636: general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)

[Jonathan Wiltshire]

reassign 594636 vlc
kthxbye

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

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

Processed: Re: Bug#594636: general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb packages (source and binary)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> reassign 594636 vlc
Bug #594636 [general] general: vlc_1.1.2.orig.tar.bz2. FAIL to make the .deb 
packages (source and binary)
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'vlc'.
> kthxbye
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
594636: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=594636
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

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

Re: Introduction

[Thomas Maass]

Did you have a look at my packages?
-- 
gpg-id: B4F786B1


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

[bts-link] source package qjackctl

[bts-link-upstream]

#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package qjackctl
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#

user bts-link-upstr...@lists.alioth.debian.org

# remote status report for #293454 (http://bugs.debian.org/293454)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050750
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Open
usertags 293454 + status-Open

# remote status report for #581440 (http://bugs.debian.org/581440)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050745
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Open
usertags 581440 + status-Open

# remote status report for #581874 (http://bugs.debian.org/581874)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050752
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Open
usertags 581874 + status-Open

# remote status report for #593877 (http://bugs.debian.org/593877)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050744
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Open
usertags 593877 + status-Open

thanks

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

[bts-link] source package src:qjackctl

[bts-link-upstream]

#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package src:qjackctl
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#

user bts-link-upstr...@lists.alioth.debian.org

# remote status report for #556304 (http://bugs.debian.org/556304)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050915
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Pending
usertags 556304 + status-Pending

thanks

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

[bts-link] source package jackeq

[bts-link-upstream]

#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package jackeq
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#

user bts-link-upstr...@lists.alioth.debian.org

# remote status report for #583923 (http://bugs.debian.org/583923)
#  * http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3049384
#  * remote status changed: (?) -> Open
usertags 583923 + status-Open

thanks

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

vlc 1.1.3-1 MIGRATED to testing

[Debian testing watch]

FYI: The status of the vlc source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.

  Previous version: 1.1.2-1
  Current version:  1.1.3-1

-- 
This email is automatically generated once a day.  As the installation of
new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive
later changes on the next day.
See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information.

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

Re: Bug#594093: NEON pass failure on ffmpeg

[Reinhard Tartler]

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 01:42:17 (CEST), Loïc Minier wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> For the base flavor, I totally agree. For the specialized neon flavor,
>> I'm not sure if that's so important. But I have to admit that I'm really
>> not an expert for armel, so I fully trust your judgement here.
>
>  Actually my test logic was wrong; I realized when implementing the v7
>  part I mentioned: if v7 isn't enabled by default, then the NEON pass
>  should enable it since NEON implies v7.  v6t2 was a distraction, I
>  removed it.

thanks!

>  I committed this to ffmpeg git, but I didn't understand the way the
>  changelog was maintained (apparently you create an entry after the last
>  upload?).  Mind fixing it up?

I've just fixed it up.

the general idea is to start an upload with an 'dummy' debian/changelog
entry indicating the next version, and finalize it using git-dch(1) just
before the upload.

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4

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

Bug#594474: top 16 rows of a portrait theora video frame are corrupted (even with -vo png)

[Timo Juhani Lindfors]

Hi,

I submitted this upstream at

http://bugzilla.mplayerhq.hu/show_bug.cgi?id=1774

and bisected the commit that causes it.




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

Bug#590706: Debug informations

[01]

Debug informations with gdb attached, hope this helps.
gdb projectM-jack 
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.0.1-debian
Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later 
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.  Type "show copying"
and "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "i486-linux-gnu".
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
...
Reading symbols from /usr/bin/projectM-jack...Reading symbols from 
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/projectM-jack...done.
(no debugging symbols found)...done.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /usr/bin/projectM-jack 
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
dir:/usr/share/projectM/config.inp 
reading ~/.projectM/config.inp 
[New Thread 0xb54f7b70 (LWP 7937)]
[New Thread 0xb0b3ab70 (LWP 7938)]
[New Thread 0xb0339b70 (LWP 7939)]
[New Thread 0xafb38b70 (LWP 7940)]
[projectM] config file: /home/fab/.projectM/config.inp
No Textures Loaded from /usr/share/projectM/textures

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xb6ddec37 in FTSize::CharSize(FT_FaceRec_**, unsigned int, unsigned int, 
unsigned int) () from /usr/lib/libftgl.so.2
(gdb) bt
#0  0xb6ddec37 in FTSize::CharSize(FT_FaceRec_**, unsigned int, unsigned int, 
unsigned int) () from /usr/lib/libftgl.so.2
#1  0xb6ddd7a1 in FTFace::Size(unsigned int, unsigned int) ()
   from /usr/lib/libftgl.so.2
#2  0xb6de5dda in FTFontImpl::FaceSize(unsigned int, unsigned int) ()
   from /usr/lib/libftgl.so.2
#3  0xb6de5002 in FTFont::FaceSize(unsigned int, unsigned int) ()
   from /usr/lib/libftgl.so.2
#4  0xb7f0c25b in Renderer (this=0x89f54e0, width=512, height=512, gx=32, 
gy=24, texsize=1024, beatDetect=0x8a046d0, _presetURL=..., 
_titlefontURL=..., _menufontURL=...)
at 
/build/rt-projectm_2.0.1+dfsg-3-i386-TokLKs/projectm-2.0.1+dfsg/src/libprojectM/Renderer/Renderer.cpp:59
#5  0xb7ec8bdf in projectM::projectM_init (this=0x89f4318, gx=32, gy=24, 
fps=35, texsize=1024, width=512, height=512)
at 
/build/rt-projectm_2.0.1+dfsg-3-i386-TokLKs/projectm-2.0.1+dfsg/src/libprojectM/projectM.cpp:488
#6  0xb7ec985a in projectM::readConfig (this=0x89f4318, configFile=...)
at 
/build/rt-projectm_2.0.1+dfsg-3-i386-TokLKs/projectm-2.0.1+dfsg/src/libprojectM/projectM.cpp:223
#7  0xb7ec9fbb in projectM (this=0x89f4318, config_file=..., flags=1)
at 
/build/rt-projectm_2.0.1+dfsg-3-i386-TokLKs/projectm-2.0.1+dfsg/src/libprojectM/projectM.cpp:121
---Type  to continue, or q  to quit---

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

Bug#594093: NEON pass failure on ffmpeg

[Loïc Minier]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> For the base flavor, I totally agree. For the specialized neon flavor,
> I'm not sure if that's so important. But I have to admit that I'm really
> not an expert for armel, so I fully trust your judgement here.

 Actually my test logic was wrong; I realized when implementing the v7
 part I mentioned: if v7 isn't enabled by default, then the NEON pass
 should enable it since NEON implies v7.  v6t2 was a distraction, I
 removed it.

 I committed this to ffmpeg git, but I didn't understand the way the
 changelog was maintained (apparently you create an entry after the last
 upload?).  Mind fixing it up?

   Thanks!
-- 
Loïc Minier



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

Bug#594568: ListIRQInfo and more needs to be in ffado-tools

[David Henningsson]

Package: ffado-tools
Version: 2.0.1+svn1856-1
Severity: important

Running ffado-diag without having ffado-mixer-qt4 installed results in
the following:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/ffado-diag", line 29, in 
from listirqinfo import IRQ,SoftIRQ,IRQInfo
ImportError: No module named listirqinfo

I found this in Ubuntu, but looking at the delta it seems like it is
present in Debian as well.

BugLink: http://launchpad.net/bugs/624514

-- 
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
http://launchpad.net/~diwic



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

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Roman Haefeli]

Hi Romain

On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 10:32 -0500, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> I have always wanted to look at PD more closely

I think it is definitely worth it. I'll be glad to help, if you need it.

> and I also packaged cwiid, 
> which I suspect is a dependency of this package.

Indeed, it is.

> Therefore, it seems I am a good candidate to look at this :-)

So I am very glad that I met you ;-)

> I will try to do it soon, ping me if no one else did it before and I did not 
> send any follow-up..

No hurry. For my part, I am very happy to join the team and to
collaborate, but forgive me if I sometimes answer mails not immediately
(as my free time is sometimes a bit fragmented) 

Roman


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

Re: Hints on packaging a library

[Reinhard Tartler]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 17:31:43 (CEST), Alexandre Quessy wrote:

> There is no debian/shlibs file in the Git repo for the packaging of
> liblo. I guess it's generated by the debian/rules file?

yes, see the manpage of dh_makeshlibs. The file is generally created
during runtime of debian/rules, but policy does not require that dynamics.

> It seems like the versioning of the shlibs rely on the
> LO_SO_VERSION=7:0:0 in configure.ac. Some project may not provide this
> upstream.

This is a libtool speciality and not every upstream uses libtool. Many
other upstreams prefer to add the -soname parameter to the linker
themselves in order to avoid libtool's complexity.

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4

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

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Roman Haefeli]

Hi Hans

Thanks for your support so far.

On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 11:52 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> A couple minor details on your ITP bug report:
> 
> - in the description, I've been using "Pd" then using "Pure Data" in  
> the long description so both are findable via search. Since its  
> written text, I think we can use the more common written forms of "Pd"  
> and "Pure Data" rather than the package name of "puredata"

Yeah, makes sense. 

> - also, I've been using the word "objects" instead of "externals"  
> since I think its clearer to more people, especially Pd newbies.

I'm not so sure about that. Personally, I find "objects" confusing for
describing shared library files, since it seems to be more often used to
describe instantiations of object classes, at least on Pd mailing list
and on #dataflow. I still think that "external" fits very well for
external libraries (which is what they are). Also with naming I am more
concerned about consistency than with newbie friendliness (hoping that
the former will be the base of the latter).

OTOH, pd-zexy which is included for a long while now also talks about
"objects". So I happily adopt your suggestion, since it somehow seems
already established. (OTOH, pd-motex talks about "externals" again)

hm..

Roman

> On Aug 25, 2010, at 7:30 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> 
> > Hi all
> >
> > Following IOhannes m zmoelnig and Hans-Christoph Steiner (both
> > subscribed to this list and both now members of the pkg-mutlimedia  
> > team)
> > I would like to join the forces to bring some Pure Data related  
> > packages
> > into Debian and to help with the maintenance of those. I hope to do  
> > this
> > in favour of both the Debian community and the Pd community.
> >
> > I've been involved in the Pd community for a few years and use the
> > software and its externals on a regular basis. I don't have written
> > externals myself, since I am no C developer, but I contributed code in
> > form of so called abstractions (modules written in the Pd language).
> >
> > I closely followed the process of finalizing the pd-motex package to
> > make it Debian ready and now that it was finally uploaded, I'd like to
> > try it myself with the package pd-wiimote.
> >
> > I posted a ITA bug report: Bug#593411
> > I am currently hosting it at:
> > http://github.com/reduzent/pd-wiimote
> >
> > Many thanks for addressing this request in advance.
> >
> > Roman
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
> > pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
> > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are  
> deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from  
> scarcity."-John Gilmore
> 
> 



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

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Roman Haefeli]

On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 14:22 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

> When that's done, you have write access to our Git area at Alioth: then 
> please upload your packaging there and let us[1] look at it together.

Thanks for your help. Am I supposed to have already access to
git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia?

I think I don't. My username on alioth is rdz-guest. 

Thanks
Roman


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

Re: vlc 1.1.3

[Mehdi Dogguy]

On 08/27/2010 12:28 AM, Christophe Mutricy wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>> I'll unblock it later…
> 
> vlc/1.1.3-1 has now built on all archs and is 5 days old.
> Could you unblock it ?
> 

Done.

-- 
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/

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

Re: Hints on packaging a library

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:31:43AM -0400, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
I was wondering if someone had hints on how to package a library. The 
things I want to package are often distributed with at least an 
executable which uses them.


My approach would be to suggest look at some library packages and try 
understand how each and every bit of information in them works.


...but it seems this is what you are doing already. :-)

Feel free to ask about bits and pieces of the packages I am involved in 
- I do try to have reasoning for every little comma in them, and would 
be happy to either clarify or be proven wrong (and then correct the bits 
revealed as being just casual or whatever).



The packages I am working and contain libraries on are: scenic, 
spinframework. I am also interested in packaging lyd.


Lyd? What is that? It is the danish (and norwegian) word for sound, but 
I never heard of it being a code project.




For now, I used CDBS, but I would like to give a try to dh 7, to
compare. :) Whatever works first...
Any examples of packages I should check out?


As you might know by now, I only have CDBS examples :-)

Feel free to pick and interrogate me about any of the 140+ packages 
which contains libraries from this list: 
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login...@jones.dk


(in worst case you dig up something I haven't polished for some time, 
but that will be beneficial to the community to then get it straightened 
up - and perhaps you might learn something in that process too?)




I looked at liblo, which is a library I know and use. It's pretty
straightforward.


Yeah, that one is almost as simple as it can get.

The rules file of that one could be much simpler if I wasn't so fond of 
some modern CDBS surplus, and .install files could be slightly trimmed 
if (or when) switching to debhelper 7.  But apart from that, liblo is 
probably as it gets.


But beware - partly it has to do with the library itself being quite 
simple: There are not really any build-dependencies, so no development 
dependencies to keep track of.


A more realistic example is liblrdf - using d-shlibs, patching source so 
needing autotools reconfiguration (with the extra juggling it brings 
when not taking the easy route of agressive gitignore use).




I found some info about the soversion (liblyd0, for example) in the
Debian policy manual.
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-shlibs
There is no debian/shlibs file in the Git repo for the packaging of
liblo. I guess it's generated by the debian/rules file?


That manual section describes how an shlibs file must end in the binary 
package, and that it _may_ end there by putting a similarly named file 
in the source package which then is installed with a debhelper script.


I prefer to resolve information dynamically whenever possible, and use 
d-shlibs for (most of) the library parts.  Might be that I got it wrong 
(I am certainly no expert in this area) but apparently the community is 
happy with e.g. uw-imap, libgd2, ghostscript, jbig2dec and other library 
packages that I maintain - none of which needs a shlibs file in the 
source package.




It seems like the versioning of the shlibs rely on the
LO_SO_VERSION=7:0:0 in configure.ac. Some project may not provide this
upstream.


If upstream do not maintain SONAME properly then you have a coding 
issue, not just a packaging one.  You can patch code during packaging 
but packaging tools do not solve broken software, so don't look there 
for magic solutions to broken upstream code.



Kind regards,

 - Jonas

--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: vlc 1.1.3

[Christophe Mutricy]

Hello,

Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> I'll unblock it later…

vlc/1.1.3-1 has now built on all archs and is 5 days old.
Could you unblock it ?

Thanks

-- 
Xtophe

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

Re: request for membership, ITA

[Roman Haefeli]

On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 14:22 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

> 
> Please read http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia - and especially 
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/Join :-)
> 
> When that's done, you have write access to our Git area at Alioth: then 
> please upload your packaging there and let us[1] look at it together.

I forgot to mention that my username on alioth is:
rdz-guest

Roman



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

a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes is NEW

[Archive Administrator]

(new) a2jmidid_6-1.debian.tar.gz optional sound
(new) a2jmidid_6-1.dsc optional sound
(new) a2jmidid_6-1_i386.deb optional sound
Daemon for exposing legacy ALSA MIDI in JACK MIDI systems
 Main goal of this project is to ease usage of legacy, not JACK-ified
 apps, in a JACK MIDI enabled system.
 a2jmidid is a daemon that implements automatic bridging. For every ALSA
 sequencer port you get one JACK MIDI port. If ALSA sequencer port is
 both one input and one output, you get two JACK MIDI ports, one input
 and one output.
(new) a2jmidid_6.orig.tar.bz2 optional sound
Changes: a2jmidid (6-1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
  * Initial Debian release. (Closes: #593734)


Override entries for your package:

Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org
Closing bugs: 593734 


Your package contains new components which requires manual editing of
the override file.  It is ok otherwise, so please be patient.  New
packages are usually added to the override file about once a week.

You may have gotten the distribution wrong.  You'll get warnings above
if files already exist in other distributions.

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

Re: Hints on packaging a library

[Felipe Sateler]

On 26/08/10 11:31, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I was wondering if someone had hints on how to package a library. The
> things I want to package are often distributed with at least an
> executable which uses them.
> 
> The packages I am working and contain libraries on are: scenic, spinframework.
> I am also interested in packaging lyd.
> 
> For now, I used CDBS, but I would like to give a try to dh 7, to
> compare. :) Whatever works first...
> Any examples of packages I should check out?

Liblo is really straightforward, as you noted. The problem with shared
libraries is not the packaging per se, but the updating of it to avoid
partial upgrades breaking, ABI breaks and other breakage.

> 
> I looked at liblo, which is a library I know and use. It's pretty
> straightforward.
> I found some info about the soversion (liblyd0, for example) in the
> Debian policy manual.
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-shlibs
> There is no debian/shlibs file in the Git repo for the packaging of
> liblo. I guess it's generated by the debian/rules file?

No, liblo doesn't have a shlibs file because it has a symbols file.
Symbols provide a finer grained dependency check, but at a higher overhead.

> 
> It seems like the versioning of the shlibs rely on the
> LO_SO_VERSION=7:0:0 in configure.ac. Some project may not provide this
> upstream.

No, that accounts for the SONAME (the 7.0.0 part after liblo.so). If a
project does not provide a SONAME, then please tell upstream to start
doing so, or just package it as a private library.


-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

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

Re: MPEG LA extends fee free use of H.264

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 05:31:45PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 16:27:01 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote:


On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 04:00:35PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:

Hi!

Just a pointer for those who might be concerned:

  
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/MPEG-LA-extends-fee-free-use-of-H-264-1067246.html


Interesting.


I don't know if, e.g. DC10 h264 video files on a server qualify as 
"streaming".


Even if it does, it is still only free-from-fee, not 
free-as-in-speech.


So are the IETF RFCs, but we still use their implementations. I think 
you're missing the point here.


Nobody is arguing here about using non-free software, but the ability 
to watch the debconf videos on mobile phones or iPads, etc., seems very 
neat to me.


PS: we have a dfsg-free implementation of an h264 encoder currently in 
NEW.


I believe the issue raised is if it makes sense for Debian/Debconf to 
*produce* actively-enforced patent-encumbered material.


Yes, I am aware this is patenting, not licensing.

Yes, it would be nice if the whole world was free, not only some 
software on top of some hardware.


No, TTBOMK Debian do not *produce* any non-free RFCs even if we ship 
some in non-free.


Yes, nobody is arguing about using non-free software. Not even me :-)


 - Jonas


[1] Debconf and Debian are separate entities, although participants 
overlap.


--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Processing of a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes

[Archive Administrator]

a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  a2jmidid_6-1.dsc
  a2jmidid_6-1.debian.tar.gz
  a2jmidid_6-1_i386.deb

Greetings,

Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)

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

a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes REJECTED

[Archive Administrator]

Reject Reasons:
a2jmidid_6-1.dsc refers to a2jmidid_6.orig.tar.bz2, but I can't find it in the 
queue or in the pool.
'dpkg-source -x' failed for a2jmidid_6-1.dsc [return code: 2].
 [dpkg-source output:] dpkg-source: warning: -sn is not a valid option for 
Dpkg::Source::Package::V3::quilt
 [dpkg-source output:] gpg: Signature made Fri Aug 27 10:13:32 2010 UTC using 
DSA key ID DCFC3FD0
 [dpkg-source output:] gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
 [dpkg-source output:] dpkg-source: failure: cannot fstat file 
./a2jmidid_6.orig.tar.bz2: No such file or directory



===

Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.


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

Processing of a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes

[Archive Administrator]

a2jmidid_6-1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  a2jmidid_6-1.dsc
  a2jmidid_6.orig.tar.bz2
  a2jmidid_6-1.debian.tar.gz
  a2jmidid_6-1_i386.deb

Greetings,

Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)

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

Re: review jack-keyboard

[rosea grammostola]

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Arnout Engelen  wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 03:45:03PM +0200, rosea grammostola wrote:
> > Please review and upload jack-keyboard, a midi keyboard for JACK MIDI
> >
> > http://git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/jack-keyboard.git/
>
> I'm pretty new to this as well, but fixing any lintian errors/warnings is
> generally a good start:
>
> Now running lintian...
> W: jack-keyboard: copyright-refers-to-deprecated-bsd-license-file
>


solved


> E: jack-keyboard: copyright-contains-dh_make-todo-boilerplate
>

solved



Could someone upload this package please? It's an virtual midi keyboard,
similar to Vkeybd but better and it uses JACK MIDI which is more accurate
then ALSA MIDI (for software).

Thanks in advance,

\r
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

pd-zexy_2.2.3-2 (please)

[IOhannes zmölnig]

i think the current git for pd-zexy includes 2 fixes that would justify
a new upload:

- fixes kFreeBSD / hurd issue (build-system guessing the wrong
module.extension)

- fixes policy-violation (sse-binaries on x86)

if you agree it would be great if you could review, tag and upload the
package (if you have the right permissions)

fgmasdr
IOhannes





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: pd-zexy compilation improvements

[IOhannes zmölnig]

On 08/24/2010 12:55 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 09:25:12AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

> Hmm. Do we then perhaps need to beware of this for helper tools like
> lintian and dh_shlibdeps?
> 
> I actually do not think that dh_shlibdeps has any role here, just
> mentioning it as an example: For Debian packaging we have a bunch of
> helper tools used either directly during packaging or during various
> tests and inspections, which rely on e.g. shared libraries ending in .so
> and located below /usr/lib.  When then unusual things are done, we might
> want to add hints for such tools to not hide potential problems from them.
> 
> Or expressed differently: Even if PureData works splendid with its
> unusual naming, we still might benefit in Debian (and derivatives) from
> using the classic .so extension if indeed it is technically the same.


i think there is no issue here at all.
we are talking about "modules" (binaries that can be dlopen()ed).

dlopen()ed modules are technically quite the same as shlibs (meaning,
the way they are built), but are used in a different way, that makes
issues such as installation path and/or rpath irrelevant (at least, as
far as i understand it)

so from this perspective, we don't have to care about the extension.
(i guess this came from my confusing use of "shared library"; sorry for
that; anyhow, debian-policy is quite clear that "modules" need not have
an .so extension)

the other point is of course, whether tools like dh_shlibdeps and
dh_strip work correctly.
i can only say from experience, that they do.
e.g. the binary Gem.pd_linux in the package "gem" is correctly stripped
and the package depends on all packages that provide libraries the
binary has been dynamically linked to.
debian/rules does not extra care of shlibs.
so it seems to "just work"

i think that changing the default extension of pd-plugins only in
Debian, will make things unnecessary complicated, as it would require to
patch the module-loader of puredata as well as practically every single
build system for externals, only to find ourselves deviant from and
incompatible with virtually any other puredata distribution.

to sum up, i don't think the gain would outweigh the cost.
(esp. since there is currently no real gain, as  adhere to the
debian-policy and all tools work as expected)

fmgdft
IOhannes



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

reply

[Michele Maiya]

Hello

My Name is Michele Maiya, can you be my soul mate?

From,
Michele.




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