Re: Introduction
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 10:02:53AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:21:47 (CET), Joel Roth wrote: Am joined to the lists. Am looking through guidelines. I maintain packages at pkg-perl. I'm familiar with the basics of git, quilt, and the dh scripts, so if someone can help me get started, I will probably be able handle most of the updating. In that case, welcome to the team, I've just added you to the team, so that you have write access to all team repositories and can create new ones. Thanks! My immediate questions are: 1) The app, mma, is not in your repository. Is that something I can introduce? sure! 2) I seem to recall that a debian package does not include all the files used to create it. If so, is there a source for the original package? (The source code package, perhaps?) I don't understand the question. You claim above that you do maintain packages with git, quilt and dh scripts in pkg-perl, we do the very same in pkg-multimedia as well, and create source packages from the git branches for testing, building and (restricted to DMs and DDs) uploading. I claim some familiarity, *and* occasionally suffer various misconceptions that I hope you will help me right. Best, Joel -- Joel Roth ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: pd-moonlib_0.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 12:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:08:20AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to git.debian.org. Its ready for re-upload. I just wanted to add that the previous condition was legal, LGPL-2.1 files can be incorporated into a GPL-2 project, so it was correct to say that the whole project could be used under the GPL-2. It is not correct to say that the whole library could be used under the LGPL-2.1 though, only some of the files, if used in isolation. Legal, yes: The licenses are indeed compatible. The issue, though, is about Policy compliance: §4.5 requires including verbatim copies of licensing - meaning that even if we legally are allowed to relicense under different compatible terms, we limit ourselves to only _reuse_ upstream licensing. The library as a whole is licensed using GPL-2 by upstream in the LICENSE.txt file. The relicensing was done upstream. More info is good, no argument there, but rejecting the package seems harsh. .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: pd-moonlib_0.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Am 05.01.2011 20:09, schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner: The library as a whole is licensed using GPL-2 by upstream in the LICENSE.txt file. The relicensing was done upstream. You are probably referring to the following clause in the LGPL-2.x: You may opt to apply the terms of the ordinary GNU General Public License instead of this License to a given copy of the Library. To do this, you must alter all the notices that refer to this License, so that they refer to the ordinary GNU General Public License, version 2, instead of to this License. The text is pretty clear what you (and upstream) has to do to get the code relicensed. Torsten ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Menus (discussion)
On 01/03/2011 11:28 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 08:35:56PM +0100, rosea.grammostola wrote: On 01/03/2011 03:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Target one is to integrate it in Debian. If your interest is integration with the Debian infrastructure - and particularly you want to improve the Debian menu system (rather than attaching an extension to it as one separately-maintained package), then... * Rewrite the list to be expressed like the Debian menu list * Rephrase intro and outro to talk about that That rewriting should be easy, as I already did that in an earlier email in this very thread. I edited the page Cool! Yes, we do indeed talk about the same thing now :-D Others here have any opinions on this? Playing a bit 'advocate of the devil' 1) I don't see other menu categories in the application menu with 3 levels (Wine entry maybe?) 2) What if I only install Audacity? Then the new menu isn't such a improvement Maybe we should do the discussion about this proposal (http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DebianMultimediaMenu) also the LAU and LAD list... \r ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Jonas is now pkg-multimedia admin
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:08, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 01:51:13PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:55:04 (CET), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Are anyone else not admins? If so, I suggest either we decide on a public policy on our reasoning for differentiating, or (preferrably) have everyone be admins at Alioth: We do use distributed VCS for all our work, so noone really can do much harm, I believe. I'd prefer to go with the principle of least priviledge, which means that admin status is only granted if someone requires or asks for it. I've noticed that you repond rather quickly to new introductions for prospective members, so having you as admin just makes sense to me. OTOH, I'd encourage everyone that currently has admin status to consider dropping it in case he doesn't require it. Then let me put it upside down: What extra responsibilities am I now burdenend with, compared to those not admins in this team? You can now accept other team members, and can edit the project page on alioth. I would like us to be as equal as possible in this team. We are not equal outside of the team (some of us have access to upload to Debian, Ubuntu, Skolelinux or other places, some are rich, some get laid etc.) but I fail to see the need for multiple access levels here in this team. I don't really see the point either, but I don't really care. It's not like we use the alioth page for much stuff... I won't spend the time setting everyone to admin status, but I won't complain if somebody else does. BTW, if someone wants to do some MIA hunting on this team, it would be cool so that we can easily check out the active members of 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: new version of milkytracker
Isn't this ready for upload now, since the switch to CDBS is completed?
Cheers
--
perl -E'$_=q;$/= @{...@_]};and s;\S+;inidehG ordnasselA;eg;say~~reverse'
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
vlc 1.1.3-1squeeze1 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the vlc source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 1.1.3-1 Current version: 1.1.3-1squeeze1 -- 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: vlc
[ Adding pkg-multimedia-maintainers in the loop, which maintains vlc, ffmpeg and mplayer ] * Paolo Marcassoli paolo.marcass...@email.it [2011-01-05 16:29:27 CET]: Are you planning to include vlc player and related packages in squeeze-backports? Note that this request already came up several times for lenny-backports: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.backports.general/5372 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.backports.general/6936 All of them remained pretty much unanswered to me. On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 18:22:16 (CET), Gerfried Fuchs wrote: Hard to tell at this time of the release - actually the version in squeeze and currently in unstable are the same so it doesn't make any sense to provide a backport. There is a newer version in experimental - but your chances are best if you ask the package maintainers of vlc and related packages themself wether they want to provide the backport. The version in experimental (and later versions) will be uploaded to unstable as soon as squeeze is released. That version will definitly require FFmpeg 0.6, also currently in experimental [*]. So the question really is if the backports team is comfortable with that backport. As maintainer, I'd be very happy to see both in squeeze-backports. On the bottom line, having FFmpeg 0.6 in -backports will require some other backports as well. The exact packages that require this unknown, but since we have symbol versioning since lenny, I expect this to be rather small. AFAIUI, only packages that use private internal types and symbols, like mplayer (which does this for historical reasons) should require this. And backporting mplayer would be an excellent idea for other reasons anyway. [*] side note: I'm really unhappy that FFmpeg 0.6 missed squeeze. I've tried to convince the release team at DC10, but they rejected it with it will hold up the freeze. -- 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: Jonas is now pkg-multimedia admin
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 15:08:44 (CET), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 01:51:13PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:55:04 (CET), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Are anyone else not admins? If so, I suggest either we decide on a public policy on our reasoning for differentiating, or (preferrably) have everyone be admins at Alioth: We do use distributed VCS for all our work, so noone really can do much harm, I believe. I'd prefer to go with the principle of least priviledge, which means that admin status is only granted if someone requires or asks for it. I've noticed that you repond rather quickly to new introductions for prospective members, so having you as admin just makes sense to me. OTOH, I'd encourage everyone that currently has admin status to consider dropping it in case he doesn't require it. Then let me put it upside down: What extra responsibilities am I now burdenend with, compared to those not admins in this team? Currently, I see (anyone feel free to correct me) - approving new applications after making sure that they are fit - editing the meta data of the alioth project I would like us to be as equal as possible in this team. We are not equal outside of the team (some of us have access to upload to Debian, Ubuntu, Skolelinux or other places, some are rich, some get laid etc.) but I fail to see the need for multiple access levels here in this team. Everyone in the team is allowed to welcome prospective members. Those that actively do so (properly) are granted admin priviledges. To my book, this makes all team members practically equal. -- 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#609125: vlc-nox postinst conifguration segfaults when regenerating plugins cache
Package: vlc-nox Version: 1.1.3-1squeeze1 Severity: important vlc-nox 1.1.3-1squeeze1 postinst configuration fails with the following message: /var/lib/dpkg/info/vlc-nox.postinst: line 4: 8614 Segmentation fault /usr/lib/vlc/vlc-cache-gen /usr/lib/vlc/plugins Just as a reference, launching vlc -vvv segfaults apparently for the same reason: [0x9f5c92c] main libvlc debug: recursively browsing `/usr/lib/vlc/plugins' Segmentation fault -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-xf Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages vlc-nox depends on: ii liba52-0.7.4 0.7.4-14library for decoding ATSC A/52 str ii libasound2 1.0.23-2.1 shared library for ALSA applicatio ii libass4 0.9.9-1 library for SSA/ASS subtitles rend ii libavahi-client3 0.6.27-2Avahi client library ii libavahi-common3 0.6.27-2Avahi common library ii libavc1394-0 0.5.3-1+b2 control IEEE 1394 audio/video devi ii libavcodec52 5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 library to encode decode multimedi ii libavformat525:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 ffmpeg file format library ii libavutil49 4:0.5.2-6 ffmpeg utility library ii libc62.11.2-7Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libcaca0 0.99.beta17-1 colour ASCII art library ii libcddb2 1.3.2-2 library to access CDDB data - runt ii libcdio100.81-4 library to read and control CD-ROM ii libdbus-1-3 1.2.24-4simple interprocess messaging syst ii libdc1394-22 2.1.2-3 high level programming interface f ii libdca0 0.0.5-3 decoding library for DTS Coherent ii libdirac-encoder 1.0.2-3 open and royalty free high quality ii libdvbpsi6 0.1.7-1 library for MPEG TS and DVB PSI ta ii libdvdnav4 4.1.3-7 DVD navigation library ii libdvdread4 4.1.3-10library for reading DVDs ii libebml0 0.7.7-3.1 access library for the EBML format ii libfaad2 2.7-6 freeware Advanced Audio Decoder - ii libflac8 1.2.1-2+b1 Free Lossless Audio Codec - runtim ii libfontconfig1 2.8.0-2.1 generic font configuration library ii libfreetype6 2.4.2-2.1 FreeType 2 font engine, shared lib ii libfribidi0 0.19.2-1Free Implementation of the Unicode ii libgcc1 1:4.4.5-8 GCC support library ii libgcrypt11 1.4.5-2 LGPL Crypto library - runtime libr ii libgnutls26 2.8.6-1 the GNU TLS library - runtime libr ii libgpg-error01.6-1 library for common error values an ii libkate1 0.3.7-3 Kate is a codec for karaoke and te ii liblircclient0 0.8.3-5 infra-red remote control support - ii liblua5.1-0 5.1.4-5 Simple, extensible, embeddable pro ii libmad0 0.15.1b-5 MPEG audio decoder library ii libmatroska0 0.8.1-1.1 extensible open standard audio/vid ii libmodplug1 1:0.8.8.1-1 shared libraries for mod music bas ii libmpcdec6 2:0.1~r459-1MusePack decoder - library ii libmpeg2-4 0.4.1-3 MPEG1 and MPEG2 video decoder libr ii libmtp8 1.0.3-1 Media Transfer Protocol (MTP) libr ii libncursesw5 5.7+20100313-4 shared libraries for terminal hand ii libogg0 1.2.0~dfsg-1Ogg bitstream library ii libpng12-0 1.2.44-1PNG library - runtime ii libpostproc515:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 postproc shared libraries ii libproxy00.3.1-2 automatic proxy configuration mana ii libraw1394-112.0.5-2 library for direct access to IEEE ii libschroedinger- 1.0.9-2 library for encoding/decoding of D ii libshout32.2.2-5+b1 MP3/Ogg Vorbis broadcast streaming ii libsmbclient 2:3.5.6~dfsg-3 shared library for communication w ii libspeex11.2~rc1-1 The Speex codec runtime library ii libstdc++6 4.4.5-8 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3 ii libswscale0 5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 ffmpeg video scaling library ii libtag1c2a 1.6.3-1 TagLib Audio Meta-Data Library ii libtheora0 1.1.1+dfsg.1-3 The Theora Video Compression Codec ii libtwolame0 0.3.12-1MPEG Audio Layer 2 encoding librar ii libudev0 164-3 libudev shared library ii libupnp3
Re: pd-moonlib_0.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 02:09:44PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 12:51 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:08:20AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Ok, I updated the debian/copyright and pushed the changes to git.debian.org. Its ready for re-upload. I just wanted to add that the previous condition was legal, LGPL-2.1 files can be incorporated into a GPL-2 project, so it was correct to say that the whole project could be used under the GPL-2. It is not correct to say that the whole library could be used under the LGPL-2.1 though, only some of the files, if used in isolation. Legal, yes: The licenses are indeed compatible. The issue, though, is about Policy compliance: §4.5 requires including verbatim copies of licensing - meaning that even if we legally are allowed to relicense under different compatible terms, we limit ourselves to only _reuse_ upstream licensing. The library as a whole is licensed using GPL-2 by upstream in the LICENSE.txt file. The relicensing was done upstream. More info is good, no argument there, but rejecting the package seems harsh. I disagree. And I suspect that you missed my point: Debian Policy §4.5 concerns each single piece of code that we redistribute - not upstream groupings of code. It is perfectly alright for upstream to treat it all as licensed together - but really the individual parts are still licensed (compatible but) differently, and this is what must be documented for Debian redistribution. ...at least as I interpret it, which seems similar to that of ftpmasters. If you disagree with the interpretation of Debian Policy, then you/we should probably move this conversation to a more appropriate list discussing that. Hope that helps. - 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: Debian Multimedia Menus (discussion)
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:17:49AM +0100, rosea.grammostola wrote: Playing a bit 'advocate of the devil' 1) I don't see other menu categories in the application menu with 3 levels (Wine entry maybe?) Iceweasel is in Applications / Network / Web Browsing It seems Science packages are generally structured in 3 layers too - e.g gelemental. 2) What if I only install Audacity? Then the new menu isn't such a improvement True. a hierarchical menu structure is beneficial when multiple applications in each category is installed. I do feel, though, that multiple audio applications being installed concurrently is quite common, and that the improvements for such cases outweigh the annoyance of a too steep menu when only a few apps are installed. Nice try :-) Maybe we should do the discussion about this proposal (http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DebianMultimediaMenu) also the LAU and LAD list... What are those acronyms? - 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: new version of milkytracker
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:24:55PM +0100, Alessandro Ghedini wrote: Isn't this ready for upload now, since the switch to CDBS is completed? Sorry, I got distracted. No, I want to finish a copyright-check I am conducting - there seem to be some issues. More on that when I am done. - 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: Jonas is now pkg-multimedia admin
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 08:23:43PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:08, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote: Then let me put it upside down: What extra responsibilities am I now burdenend with, compared to those not admins in this team? You can now accept other team members, and can edit the project page on alioth. I don't want to be superior to others just for the sake of it! If we keep this hierarchy without solid reasons for it, then please make me a peasant again! - 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: Debian Multimedia Menus (discussion)
On 01/06/2011 08:51 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 11:17:49AM +0100, rosea.grammostola wrote: Playing a bit 'advocate of the devil' 1) I don't see other menu categories in the application menu with 3 levels (Wine entry maybe?) Iceweasel is in Applications / Network / Web Browsing It seems Science packages are generally structured in 3 layers too - e.g gelemental. 2) What if I only install Audacity? Then the new menu isn't such a improvement True. a hierarchical menu structure is beneficial when multiple applications in each category is installed. I do feel, though, that multiple audio applications being installed concurrently is quite common, and that the improvements for such cases outweigh the annoyance of a too steep menu when only a few apps are installed. Nice try :-) Maybe we should do the discussion about this proposal (http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DebianMultimediaMenu) also the LAU and LAD list... What are those acronyms? Linux Audio User and Linux Audio Developer mailinglist www.linuxaudio,org \r ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Jonas is now pkg-multimedia admin
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 03:49:19PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 15:08:44 (CET), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 01:51:13PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:55:04 (CET), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Are anyone else not admins? If so, I suggest either we decide on a public policy on our reasoning for differentiating, or (preferrably) have everyone be admins at Alioth: We do use distributed VCS for all our work, so noone really can do much harm, I believe. I'd prefer to go with the principle of least priviledge, which means that admin status is only granted if someone requires or asks for it. I've noticed that you repond rather quickly to new introductions for prospective members, so having you as admin just makes sense to me. OTOH, I'd encourage everyone that currently has admin status to consider dropping it in case he doesn't require it. Then let me put it upside down: What extra responsibilities am I now burdenend with, compared to those not admins in this team? Currently, I see (anyone feel free to correct me) - approving new applications after making sure that they are fit - editing the meta data of the alioth project - grant others membership of the admin club I would like us to be as equal as possible in this team. We are not equal outside of the team (some of us have access to upload to Debian, Ubuntu, Skolelinux or other places, some are rich, some get laid etc.) but I fail to see the need for multiple access levels here in this team. Everyone in the team is allowed to welcome prospective members. Those that actively do so (properly) are granted admin priviledges. To my book, this makes all team members practically equal. In my vocabulary that might be _principally_ equal, but practically not: It's like saying we all are practically conomically equal when we can all buy lottery tickets. What do others think? - 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
Processing of audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.changes
audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: audacity_1.3.12-9.dsc audacity_1.3.12-9.debian.tar.gz audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb audacity-data_1.3.12-9_all.deb audacity-dbg_1.3.12-9_amd64.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
audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Accepted: audacity-data_1.3.12-9_all.deb to main/a/audacity/audacity-data_1.3.12-9_all.deb audacity-dbg_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb to main/a/audacity/audacity-dbg_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb audacity_1.3.12-9.debian.tar.gz to main/a/audacity/audacity_1.3.12-9.debian.tar.gz audacity_1.3.12-9.dsc to main/a/audacity/audacity_1.3.12-9.dsc audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb to main/a/audacity/audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb Override entries for your package: audacity-data_1.3.12-9_all.deb - optional sound audacity-dbg_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb - extra debug audacity_1.3.12-9.dsc - source sound audacity_1.3.12-9_amd64.deb - optional sound Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian. ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#609125: vlc-nox postinst conifguration segfaults when regenerating plugins cache
Le Thu 06 Jan 11 à 16:01 +0100, Francesco Castellana a écrit : Package: vlc-nox Version: 1.1.3-1squeeze1 /var/lib/dpkg/info/vlc-nox.postinst: line 4: 8614 Segmentation fault /usr/lib/vlc/vlc-cache-gen /usr/lib/vlc/plugins [0x9f5c92c] main libvlc debug: recursively browsing `/usr/lib/vlc/plugins' Segmentation fault Could you try to get a backtrace with gdb ? if you have vlc-dbg installed or manage to install it it would be even better. ii libavcodec52 5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 library to encode decode multimedi ii libavformat525:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 ffmpeg file format library ii libpostproc515:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 postproc shared libraries ii libswscale0 5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 ffmpeg video scaling library ii libavutil50 5:0.6.1+svn20101128-0.1 avutil shared libraries - runtime I know it will sound a bit far-fetched. But could you try to uninstall your unofficial ffmpeg packages and retry with the one of debian. -- Xtophe ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
