Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 00:34, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 23:54 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 23:27, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> > Your changes make sense to me, looks ready for uploading as far as I am >> > concerned. >> >> Please update the changelog (I would not like to put my name in your work >> ;)). > > Done! Uploading... -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 23:54 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 23:27, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Your changes make sense to me, looks ready for uploading as far as I am > > concerned. > > Please update the changelog (I would not like to put my name in your work ;)). Done! .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 23:27, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > Your changes make sense to me, looks ready for uploading as far as I am > concerned. Please update the changelog (I would not like to put my name in your work ;)). -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 23:17 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 01:01, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > > > On Oct 30, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:23, Hans-Christoph Steiner > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >>> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner > wrote: > > > > Hey all, > > > > So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 > > is > > released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two > > packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. > > > > Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of > > the > > packages that I have ITP'ed. > > Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I > will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your > DM status approved. > >>> > >>> I actually have started my DM application before debconf10. The DebConf > >>> people that I worked with said I should get someone who knows the stuff > >>> that > >>> I package to sponsor my DM application. None of the debconf nyc > >>> localteam > >>> do any multimedia stuff. So at this point, once I find someone willing > >>> to > >>> sponsor me, I can revive my DM application email and complete the > >>> process. > >>> > >>> Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to make things go > >>> smoother. > >> > >> It's not trouble, just standard practice to put the flag after the DM > >> status is attained. > >> Unfortunately, I cannot in good conscience advocate your DM > >> application until I have further worked with you. Maybe after a few > >> more package uploads ;). > > > > Perfect, I have about 10 that are ready to upload! :-) > > > > > And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< > 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. > >>> > >>> Thanks for uploading pd-libdir! puredata 0.43 has changed the way the > >>> headers are installed, so pd libraries that rely on certain headers will > >>> have to change once 0.43 hits the repos. I think its important to get > >>> this > >>> stuff into Debian working with 0.42, and I'm willing to do the legwork of > >>> packaging first for pd 0.42, then updating for 0.43. > >> > >> I understand the need for the build-depends, which is what I read from > >> your description above (pd-libdir has the same restriction). However, > >> puredata-import (the binary package) Depends on puredata << 0.43. Is > >> that intended? If so, please explain why. > > > > Depends: puredata (< 0.43) is a mistake, I think, now that I look at it. > > I'll change it and push the changes once I get the chance. But feel free > > to make the change if you beat me to it. > > Good, I see you fixed this. > > > > >> Also, while we are on it, why the naming scheme change? Shouldn't it > >> be pd-import? > > > > So there are multiple flavors of 'pd' but only one is currently packaged > > (puredata). I am in the process of packaging the other major flavor, > > Pd-extended as pdextended and that package will also provide 'pd'. > > Pd-extended/pdextended has "import" built-in, so it doesn't need the > > "import" from the package. Therefore puredata-import is targeted to only > > 'puredata' not anything that that provides 'pd'. > > I've added a description and removed an unnecesary note on debian/copyright. > Please rephrase the description if it does not conform to pd-speak, > and update the changelog. Then we can upload. Your changes make sense to me, looks ready for uploading as far as I am concerned. .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 01:01, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > On Oct 30, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:23, Hans-Christoph Steiner >> wrote: >>> >>> On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Hey all, > > So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 > is > released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two > packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. > > Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of > the > packages that I have ITP'ed. Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your DM status approved. >>> >>> I actually have started my DM application before debconf10. The DebConf >>> people that I worked with said I should get someone who knows the stuff >>> that >>> I package to sponsor my DM application. None of the debconf nyc >>> localteam >>> do any multimedia stuff. So at this point, once I find someone willing >>> to >>> sponsor me, I can revive my DM application email and complete the >>> process. >>> >>> Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to make things go >>> smoother. >> >> It's not trouble, just standard practice to put the flag after the DM >> status is attained. >> Unfortunately, I cannot in good conscience advocate your DM >> application until I have further worked with you. Maybe after a few >> more package uploads ;). > > Perfect, I have about 10 that are ready to upload! :-) > > And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. >>> >>> Thanks for uploading pd-libdir! puredata 0.43 has changed the way the >>> headers are installed, so pd libraries that rely on certain headers will >>> have to change once 0.43 hits the repos. I think its important to get >>> this >>> stuff into Debian working with 0.42, and I'm willing to do the legwork of >>> packaging first for pd 0.42, then updating for 0.43. >> >> I understand the need for the build-depends, which is what I read from >> your description above (pd-libdir has the same restriction). However, >> puredata-import (the binary package) Depends on puredata << 0.43. Is >> that intended? If so, please explain why. > > Depends: puredata (< 0.43) is a mistake, I think, now that I look at it. > I'll change it and push the changes once I get the chance. But feel free > to make the change if you beat me to it. Good, I see you fixed this. > >> Also, while we are on it, why the naming scheme change? Shouldn't it >> be pd-import? > > So there are multiple flavors of 'pd' but only one is currently packaged > (puredata). I am in the process of packaging the other major flavor, > Pd-extended as pdextended and that package will also provide 'pd'. > Pd-extended/pdextended has "import" built-in, so it doesn't need the > "import" from the package. Therefore puredata-import is targeted to only > 'puredata' not anything that that provides 'pd'. I've added a description and removed an unnecesary note on debian/copyright. Please rephrase the description if it does not conform to pd-speak, and update the changelog. Then we can upload. -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Oct 30, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:23, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Hey all, So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the packages that I have ITP'ed. Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your DM status approved. I actually have started my DM application before debconf10. The DebConf people that I worked with said I should get someone who knows the stuff that I package to sponsor my DM application. None of the debconf nyc localteam do any multimedia stuff. So at this point, once I find someone willing to sponsor me, I can revive my DM application email and complete the process. Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to make things go smoother. It's not trouble, just standard practice to put the flag after the DM status is attained. Unfortunately, I cannot in good conscience advocate your DM application until I have further worked with you. Maybe after a few more package uploads ;). Perfect, I have about 10 that are ready to upload! :-) And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. Thanks for uploading pd-libdir! puredata 0.43 has changed the way the headers are installed, so pd libraries that rely on certain headers will have to change once 0.43 hits the repos. I think its important to get this stuff into Debian working with 0.42, and I'm willing to do the legwork of packaging first for pd 0.42, then updating for 0.43. I understand the need for the build-depends, which is what I read from your description above (pd-libdir has the same restriction). However, puredata-import (the binary package) Depends on puredata << 0.43. Is that intended? If so, please explain why. Depends: puredata (< 0.43) is a mistake, I think, now that I look at it. I'll change it and push the changes once I get the chance. But feel free to make the change if you beat me to it. Also, while we are on it, why the naming scheme change? Shouldn't it be pd-import? So there are multiple flavors of 'pd' but only one is currently packaged (puredata). I am in the process of packaging the other major flavor, Pd-extended as pdextended and that package will also provide 'pd'. Pd-extended/pdextended has "import" built-in, so it doesn't need the "import" from the package. Therefore puredata-import is targeted to only 'puredata' not anything that that provides 'pd'. .hc There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:23, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner >> wrote: >>> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is >>> released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two >>> packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. >>> >>> Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the >>> packages that I have ITP'ed. >> >> Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I >> will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your >> DM status approved. > > I actually have started my DM application before debconf10. The DebConf > people that I worked with said I should get someone who knows the stuff that > I package to sponsor my DM application. None of the debconf nyc localteam > do any multimedia stuff. So at this point, once I find someone willing to > sponsor me, I can revive my DM application email and complete the process. > > Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to make things go smoother. It's not trouble, just standard practice to put the flag after the DM status is attained. Unfortunately, I cannot in good conscience advocate your DM application until I have further worked with you. Maybe after a few more package uploads ;). > >> And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< >> 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. > > Thanks for uploading pd-libdir! puredata 0.43 has changed the way the > headers are installed, so pd libraries that rely on certain headers will > have to change once 0.43 hits the repos. I think its important to get this > stuff into Debian working with 0.42, and I'm willing to do the legwork of > packaging first for pd 0.42, then updating for 0.43. I understand the need for the build-depends, which is what I read from your description above (pd-libdir has the same restriction). However, puredata-import (the binary package) Depends on puredata << 0.43. Is that intended? If so, please explain why. Also, while we are on it, why the naming scheme change? Shouldn't it be pd-import? -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Oct 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Hey all, So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the packages that I have ITP'ed. Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your DM status approved. I actually have started my DM application before debconf10. The DebConf people that I worked with said I should get someone who knows the stuff that I package to sponsor my DM application. None of the debconf nyc localteam do any multimedia stuff. So at this point, once I find someone willing to sponsor me, I can revive my DM application email and complete the process. Sorry if I caused any trouble, I was just trying to make things go smoother. And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. Thanks for uploading pd-libdir! puredata 0.43 has changed the way the headers are installed, so pd libraries that rely on certain headers will have to change once 0.43 hits the repos. I think its important to get this stuff into Debian working with 0.42, and I'm willing to do the legwork of packaging first for pd 0.42, then updating for 0.43. .hc "A cellphone to me is just an opportunity to be irritated wherever you are." - Linus Torvalds ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Hey all, > > So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is > released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two > packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. > > Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the > packages that I have ITP'ed. Why did you put the DMUA field before starting your DM application? I will upload them, although with the field removed until you get your DM status approved. And another question, why does puredata-import depends on puredata (<< 0.43)? I just uploaded pd-libdir for now. -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Oct 25, 2010, at 6:53 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the packages that I have ITP'ed. I'll try to get some time this week to review them. Excellent, thank you! Also, on a related topic, I want to become a Debian Maintainer, so I was wondering if now would be a good time to do that. I was part of the localteam for DebConf NYC, and I've been using Debian since '99. Me being a DM might make that list of remaining ITPs that I've posted look less daunting ;-) .hc "[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: puredata-dev (was: Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir)
On Oct 25, 2010, at 6:52 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Hey all, So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. Why has this decision been taken? Pd 0.43 has a lot of big changes, including how the headers are installed, and the we've gone this long without a puredata-dev package, so it makes sense to wait until 0.43 is added to Debian, especially since 0.43 would never make it into Squeeze. IOhannes wrote up a big email about it, its mostly his work, I'll let him forward it as he sees fit. .hc "Free software means you control what your computer does. Non-free software means someone else controls that, and to some extent controls you." - Richard M. Stallman ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the > packages that I have ITP'ed. I'll try to get some time this week to review them. -- 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
puredata-dev (was: Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir)
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:28, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Hey all, > > So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is > released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two > packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. Why has this decision been taken? -- 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: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
Hey all, So the plan for puredata-dev has been pushed off until Pure Data 0.43 is released and packaged, so I think that the approach used in these two packages is going to be necessary for the timebeing. Can anyone upload these two? They are needed as deps for the rest of the packages that I have ITP'ed. .hc On Sep 22, 2010, at 2:10 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm following up to see whether someone will sponsor these packages. All of the rest of the packages that I've ITP'ed depend on these, so I would like to get these in so I can continue submitting the rest of the libraries. I think that it'll be a while before puredata-dev gets sorted out and uploaded, and puredata 0.43 is not even released yet, so I think its worthwhile to upload these with the current patched workaround. Plus once I become DM or DD, then I can do the follow-up uploading myself, thereby not inconveniencing anyone else :) If someone here will vouch for me, I'll revive my DM application now. :-D .hc On Sep 13, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Ok, I figure while we are on a roll, I'll feed in a few more from my backlog. The ones so far are just standard Pd libraries, so pretty straightforward. These two, puredata-import and pd-libdir, are things to support libraries, so they are not big, but more complicated to package. Also, the lack of puredata-dev makes it a bit more complicated (its in collab-maint/puredata.git awaiting attention from the Maintainer). These two are quite important so I wanted to get them in now, then when/if puredata-dev arrives, I'll amend them appropriately. You'll notice that these two packages include two headers as a patch. That's what should be in puredata-dev, but are not yet. We also just streamlined the installation of headers upstream in 0.43, that's why these depend on puredata (<< 0.43). There is also the naming of pd-import vs puredata-import. Basically, there are multiple forks of Pd, 'puredata' represents the original. I hope to package 'pdanywhere' and 'pdextended' soon. That's the origin of the "Provides: pd", these packages will all provide 'pd'. puredata-import is not called pd-import because its meant for only 'puredata', not 'pdextended' for example. 'pdextended' has the import object built-in, so 'pdextended' will "Provides: pd-import". Also, libdir-1.9.tar.gz and import-1.3.tar.gz were recently uploaded to sourceforge, so they are not showing up for me yet with a "uscan -- dehs --report". .hc Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it can change entire economies. - Amy Smith If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
I'm following up to see whether someone will sponsor these packages. All of the rest of the packages that I've ITP'ed depend on these, so I would like to get these in so I can continue submitting the rest of the libraries. I think that it'll be a while before puredata-dev gets sorted out and uploaded, and puredata 0.43 is not even released yet, so I think its worthwhile to upload these with the current patched workaround. Plus once I become DM or DD, then I can do the follow-up uploading myself, thereby not inconveniencing anyone else :) If someone here will vouch for me, I'll revive my DM application now. :-D .hc On Sep 13, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Ok, I figure while we are on a roll, I'll feed in a few more from my backlog. The ones so far are just standard Pd libraries, so pretty straightforward. These two, puredata-import and pd-libdir, are things to support libraries, so they are not big, but more complicated to package. Also, the lack of puredata-dev makes it a bit more complicated (its in collab-maint/puredata.git awaiting attention from the Maintainer). These two are quite important so I wanted to get them in now, then when/if puredata-dev arrives, I'll amend them appropriately. You'll notice that these two packages include two headers as a patch. That's what should be in puredata-dev, but are not yet. We also just streamlined the installation of headers upstream in 0.43, that's why these depend on puredata (<< 0.43). There is also the naming of pd-import vs puredata-import. Basically, there are multiple forks of Pd, 'puredata' represents the original. I hope to package 'pdanywhere' and 'pdextended' soon. That's the origin of the "Provides: pd", these packages will all provide 'pd'. puredata-import is not called pd-import because its meant for only 'puredata', not 'pdextended' for example. 'pdextended' has the import object built-in, so 'pdextended' will "Provides: pd-import". Also, libdir-1.9.tar.gz and import-1.3.tar.gz were recently uploaded to sourceforge, so they are not showing up for me yet with a "uscan -- dehs --report". .hc Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it can change entire economies. - Amy Smith ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
next, two small, weird-ish packages: puredata-import and pd-libdir
Ok, I figure while we are on a roll, I'll feed in a few more from my backlog. The ones so far are just standard Pd libraries, so pretty straightforward. These two, puredata-import and pd-libdir, are things to support libraries, so they are not big, but more complicated to package. Also, the lack of puredata-dev makes it a bit more complicated (its in collab-maint/puredata.git awaiting attention from the Maintainer). These two are quite important so I wanted to get them in now, then when/if puredata-dev arrives, I'll amend them appropriately. You'll notice that these two packages include two headers as a patch. That's what should be in puredata-dev, but are not yet. We also just streamlined the installation of headers upstream in 0.43, that's why these depend on puredata (<< 0.43). There is also the naming of pd-import vs puredata-import. Basically, there are multiple forks of Pd, 'puredata' represents the original. I hope to package 'pdanywhere' and 'pdextended' soon. That's the origin of the "Provides: pd", these packages will all provide 'pd'. puredata-import is not called pd-import because its meant for only 'puredata', not 'pdextended' for example. 'pdextended' has the import object built-in, so 'pdextended' will "Provides: pd-import". Also, libdir-1.9.tar.gz and import-1.3.tar.gz were recently uploaded to sourceforge, so they are not showing up for me yet with a "uscan --dehs --report". .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
