Accepted mplayer-blue 1.11-2 (source) into unstable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 07:18:53 -0400 Source: mplayer-blue Binary: mplayer-skin-blue Architecture: source Version: 1.11-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers <debian-multime...@lists.debian.org> Changed-By: Miguel A. Colón Vélez <debian.mic...@gmail.com> Description: mplayer-skin-blue - Blue skin for MPlayer Changes: mplayer-blue (1.11-2) unstable; urgency=medium . [ Ondřej Nový ] * d/copyright: Use https protocol in Format field * d/control: Set Vcs-* to salsa.debian.org * d/changelog: Remove trailing whitespaces . [ Miguel A. Colón Vélez ] * debian/control: - Update the Maintainer field. - Bump Standards-Version to 4.1.3. Checksums-Sha1: b8bd4e788caae75c311c1bf2fb1d06187e6f0217 2005 mplayer-blue_1.11-2.dsc 31a26182ec07002553df2fcc9cd076abab779c87 3744 mplayer-blue_1.11-2.debian.tar.xz 83fe6be0f5b367bfb5c73400836cefbc8433a0f0 5089 mplayer-blue_1.11-2_source.buildinfo Checksums-Sha256: 2652503f2d90a96b5618151f0f8387d3962c9bda97cd6bc0b0111584730d51d3 2005 mplayer-blue_1.11-2.dsc 57dfd6664eb0ff501207ec6cdacf744e23cfd7724fb7529c97672a838c1093b0 3744 mplayer-blue_1.11-2.debian.tar.xz 59657633a9565bd12b12af2ea43a0c04bd22ca2d7ffd3b5100ce5e0f39833b8f 5089 mplayer-blue_1.11-2_source.buildinfo Files: 6a03f88df9421c5ca6c585257935501a 2005 graphics optional mplayer-blue_1.11-2.dsc 14beaa3a15eea13a7ab8e2e7ab259ebf 3744 graphics optional mplayer-blue_1.11-2.debian.tar.xz 38ecdfef06380235843fe771b974dd43 5089 graphics optional mplayer-blue_1.11-2_source.buildinfo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQJMBAEBCgA2FiEENOnjFlTLpVmSlkOpBqYhQj/x9pMFAlqs/CgYHGRlYmlhbi5t aWNvdmVAZ21haWwuY29tAAoJEAamIUI/8faTBegQAKCLTDcrKitxcdvYtNSKcQ+M 7PD0SMcZfqSOCoKVPNNQErzk7vTS2+ndGYHKHtdzaw0zDxALqRY3ZnFYE/FhXXyg derCNBLBZORwNhIJRo6Iz5TVu/5u127t3bRH0apR9hODBM0lHNjM6Juz/3f3lqnC 2nhIl8EHfm4eLPj0yoRlSiIGJBBvqm1rjiByaU6AI+gAsSWVHd+BpZf6dNzbi8vX IQx17lX7q2cWGq9lfMnhJbcxrnRLhNQOl19/ZYgnamF2K6ruf+OgF9a4Xh2rLAjq zbRV7MntrRwPltSg8jlVxNy0ahYTHdSAEZcuHkeolJA4xamuyfFDqZRLzpG8mqcH 8lza/r7yYnHG1pFwCcu82PotIt5Sb4RjzesBGQ1zzInIf4Ckh60wZ3YgMxSdH6ME pUwiIIRfi1de9gFyBq9ij2x8CC0SxTvqhH7Gdbbh3W5nnDKe+hhpFPb4rME/zH81 BIHN3sTq4onoTofvr0x7A+Z1nnugn+n7+lZUDTFI8SwVz8nxvkBopqY0Z5XJen3x mPyfwYrEVWk4oTdzSGIAkVOYBsz/OxS5PwYAKtE27O9gaK5AMYEzTBMy5IMQV3iF gDRUGZWkzWgy871T/oRWDSquktAfKgVlpTbazebxir+P3UTfCV8Hxa/YAtwWhKOZ /AbWbICI1SLI0rXWH0gf =3gXm -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#803844: mplayer: FTBFS with FFmpeg 2.9
> Dear Maintainer, > > the next version of FFmpeg is planned to be released this month > (and it might be called 3.0 instead of 2.9). > > As this is already fixed upstream, it would be great if you > could upload a package with the relevant cherry-picked patches. > > If this bug isn't fixed soon, it will become release critical and > thus the package will either get NMUed or removed from testing. > > Best regards, > Andreas Hello Andreas: I was waiting for a clear idea of when FFmpeg was going to release to decide if I should patch 1.2 or just take an upstream snapshot. Most of the new bugs reports are fixed upstream so I will probably use an upstream snapshot. Thanks for the reminder. -Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#799402: fixed in soundtouch 1.9.2-1
>When will this migrate to unstable? When the release team gives the green light to upload to unstable in https://bugs.debian.org/799796. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Uploading soundtouch to Experimental [NEW trip]
Hi: Could someone check (I think I got it right) and upload the new upstream release of soundtouch [1] to experimental? It requires a trip through NEW so I can't do it myself. Upstream broke ABI in 1.9.1 without a SONAME bump and bumped the SONAME in 1.9.2. I already tested all the reverse dependencies and everything works and builds fine. I need to get it through NEW to be able to schedule the transition and fix the 10 currently broken packages in sid.. Thanks for all, Miguel [1] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/soundtouch.git ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Uploading soundtouch to Experimental [NEW trip]
> What's the reason behind Conflicts + Replaces + Provides in libsoundtouch-dev? > libsoundtouch1-dev never existed. > > Cheers > -- > Sebastian Ramacher It still exists: https://packages.debian.org/squeeze/libsoundtouch1-dev I left it there since from my understanding squeeze is in LTS till 2016-02-06 and I thought that I still needed to support upgrading from it. Now that I look at it again it could have been relaxed to a break but that Conflict is from before I started maintaining the package. Also, libsoundtouch1 should break/replace libsoundtouch1c2 if I'm still going to support upgrading from squeeze. Should I change any of those now or wait till the unstable upload? Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#799402: libsoundtouch0: ABI breakage in 1.9.1-1
Hello: I contacted upstream about it earlier and was about to open a bug report. The library currently is versioned by upsteam as 0.0.0 but upstream broke the ABI without bumping the SONAME. I sent a patch upstream to bump the SONAME but I have not heard from him yet but it has only been hours. I'm trying to see if upstream will bump the soname to 1 or re-add the removed symbols. I could bump the SONAME to 0debian1 if I don't get a reply from upstream soon. I'm already preparing a package and checking if all the reverse dependencies build. I already checked dolphin-emu and and a rebuild fixes it. So the transition should be easy. For a SONAME bump I would also need someone to upload it to experimental since it would require a trip via NEW. Two trips if we go 0 -> 0debian1 -> 1. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Req. Uploading of mplayer
Hello all, I prepared a new revision of mplayer in git [1]. This should fix the FTBFS in kfreebsd and fix some other minor issues. Cheers, Miguel [1] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/mplayer.git ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Uploading mediatomb to wheezy-pu
Could you please fix the changelog? s/wheezy/oldstable/ I'll eventually upload it. Oh, I looked at some of the resolved bugs for wheezy-pu and they used wheezy so I thought that was correct. Sorry about that. I just fixed it by doing dch -r -D oldstable. Thanks for the help, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: mplayer on x32: working❣
• the default -ao alsa does not work because it uses an ioctl that appears to be broken on x32 (and possibly some MIPS variants), as ioctls are not yet triarch’d (fallback to -ao sdl:aalib also fails) ⇒ fix: tglase@tglase:~ $ cat .mplayer/config ao=oss This works perfectly. Can we address this somehow on the userland side until the kernel is fixed? Maybe make OSS default on x32 or, better, adding OSS as fallback to try when ALSA fails? I pushed a commit to git which changes /etc/mplayer/mplayer.conf in x32 from ao=pulse,alsa,sdl:aalib to ao=pulse,alsa,oss,sdl:aalib Does this helps? Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Uploading mediatomb to wheezy-pu
Hello all, I opened the following bug report: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793028 for backporting the recent mediatomb security related fix into wheezy. The security team (after asking them) suggested the pu and the release team gave it the go ahead already. Could someone upload and tag the wheezy branch from git [1] into wheezy/oldstable pu? Cheers, Miguel [1] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/mediatomb.git ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Requesting upload of MPlayer.
Hello all, I finished the packaging for reintroducing MPlayer[1] to unstable. Could someone upload it? The FFmpeg transition is far enough that I think it could be uploaded. The package will spend a fair amount of time in NEW so might as well get the counter running if there are no objections to the upload. Cheers, Miguel [1] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/mplayer.git ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: return of the mpalyer package?!
Yes, I'm still interested in joining the team. The most important thing to me here is that mplayer be available in debian and that there be support behind it. Toward that end, I believe I can contribute. Sounds good. Regarding process, I have a couple grievances I want to air. 1. I did *not* know that anything was being worked on, and I apologize for the duplicate effort. I tried (several times, actually) to contact you, and I received no reply either on IRC (which is how you contacted me) or to my mail to the list (which is what your wiki says I'm supposed to do to join the team). Therefore, I assumed that there was no work being done, since you had offered cooperation. It saddens me that the default response is to declare me hostile rather than out of the loop. 2. Further, there has been an RFE/ITP bug open for mplayer+mencoder since date -d 'Fri, 03 Oct 2014 01:08:23 +0200'. It is number 763826. This is my first attempt at maintaining a package and I am not overly familiar with the process, but my understanding is that the workflow goes RFE-ITP-package upload, in rough terms. I announced intent to package (and set bug status as such) on date -d 'Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:58:51 -0500'. It has not changed since. Again, I am new, but it is VERY surprising to me that one could expect to upload a package without owning the ITP. It is especially irritating for this to be dubbed a hijack, as to me it feels the opposite. I would prefer to just work on packaging but might as well reply to this. In our initial conversation I mentioned that I was working on it, was about to push it to git and asked you to join if you wanted to help. It should have been clear that it was being worked on but misunderstanding happen so fine. For the rest I will just point you to the Developers Rerence: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#adopting In particular: It is not OK to simply take over a package that you feel is neglected — that would be package hijacking. You can, of course, contact the current maintainer and ask them if you may take over the package. and Generally, you may not take over the package without the assent of the current maintainer. Even if they ignore you, that is still not grounds to take over a package. Complaints about maintainers should be brought up on the developers' mailing list. If the discussion doesn't end with a positive conclusion, and the issue is of a technical nature, consider bringing it to the attention of the technical committee (see the technical committee web page for more information). The package is still in Debian, is not orphaned, still list Debian Multimedia as the maintainer and the git repository shows activity therefore most of that section applies. Also as discussed in bug #763148 it was known since at least 28 Sep 2014 that most likely only one of libav/ffmpeg would stay in Debian. Libav was the official library until just 2 weeks ago therefore the prudent approach was to wait until all that got sorted out and wait until a FFmpeg transition (if it ever happened) to reintroduce the package. All that being said: yes, I'm still interested in seeing this through. I've accepted your request: welcome aboard! Please go through [1] and [2], and if you have questions please do not hesitate to ask. [1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/Join [2] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DevelopPackaging Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: return of the mpalyer package?!
Hi, I think it was a little rude to assume this. You could have asked him on IRC or on the ITP bug, so as to avoid duplicate work. The delay in uploading was actually largely my fault for being slow in sponsoring. I disagree with this assessment. Is usually the responsibility of any new maintainer to contact the old maintainer for any package they want to salvage/hijack. In this case I made the initial contact as a way to show that work was actually being done in the package and asked him to join the Team since help is always appreciated. Since the other party knew the package was being worked on. It's rude to upload anything. My understanding was that Robbie attempted to go through the procedure to join the team but that there was some miscommunication so no progress happened. He did ask, http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2015-March/043292.html Hopefully someone with admin right in the group can help to add him if he is still interested and there are no objections. I'm CC Reinhard to see if he can help. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: return of the mpalyer package?!
My understanding was that Robbie attempted to go through the procedure to join the team but that there was some miscommunication so no progress happened. He did ask, http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2015-March/043292.html Hopefully someone with admin right in the group can help to add him if he is still interested and there are no objections. As a followup to this. Robbie please tell me if you are still interested in joining the team so you can be added in Alioth. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#792672: Assertion error in meters.lv2
Package: x42-plugins Version: 20150702-1 Hello: Someone at the #debian-multimedia channel dropped this report olinuxx Hi guys, I've a bug to report against x42-plugins olinuxx the meters, both as LV2 or standalone app (x42-meter) who are normaly displaying a needle are segfaulting olinuxx using them in ardour crash it olinuxx the error log is : x42-meter: ./gui/needle.c:118: void img2surf(const MyGimpImage*, cairo_surface_t**, unsigned char**): Assertion `ys + xs (img-width * img-height + img-bytes_per_pixel)' failed. olinuxx (you can get it trying x42-meter 6 as an example) olinuxx this is the case with a fresh Jessie install with the backport from stretch, as well as a fresh Stretch install olinuxx I didn't looked deep yet into BTS reporting, so I'm putting that here, hopefully, someone will pick it up I looked at the source and the fix is trivial. It should be * and not + as in: -assert (ys + xs (img-width * img-height + img-bytes_per_pixel)); +assert (ys + xs (img-width * img-height * img-bytes_per_pixel)); ys + xs is a sequence that accumulates the total number of bytes and it goes img-bytes_per_pixel, img-bytes_per_pixel*1, img-bytes_per_pixel*2, ... img-bytes_per_pixel*(img-width * img-height -1) It seems upstream wanted to bound ys + xs by the next value in the sequence which is (img-width * img-height * img-bytes_per_pixel). This makes the assertion always true since it will be short of the upper bound by at least img-bytes_per_pixel. Upstream's commit suggest that there may be another issue https://github.com/x42/meters.lv2/commit/70497bb8b77aa5ddf13801b0a1472525cfbe42e7 with array boundaries but that is independent of this report. I have never run or compiled these plugins but the math seems to add up. Hope my pseudo-patch helps. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: return of the mpalyer package?!
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@debian.org wrote: Hi all, has anyone seen this yet? https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/mplayer_2:1.1.1+r37401-1.html Does anyone know what is going on, has anyone been informed, has anyone been contacted by the package maintainer or sponsor (CC:ed)? I mean, even if this package was removed from unstable and was not in jessie, it is still a pkg-multimedia package, or not? So this tastes like package hijack to me. Please clarify. Hello: I saw the ITP on 2014-12-01 and contacted the person on IRC the same day (~2 weeks after the ITP). micove hello ... I'm from the debian multimedia team I was about to commit some changes to the git repo but I noticed that you had filed a ITP micove would you like to join the team? frozencemetery hi, nice to meet you. Sure; I'd love to cooperate with you all! This is my first debian package, so apologies if I'm a little slow on thing He joined the #debian-multimedia channel since that day. My understanding was that he was going to formally join the team and help maintain the package under the team umbrella. I had not heard from him since that day so I assumed he was no longer interested in packaging MPlayer. I was in contact with Reinhard and he had reviewed (not sure if he has seen the last 10 commits) http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-multimedia/mplayer.git/log/?h=master.experimental and seemed pleased with the packaging. I already finished all my changes as of 20 hours ago and since the transitional FFmpeg hit experimental a few hours ago it compiles with the new FFmpeg package names. Reinhard may have more information about the status of the package in the team. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: return of the mpalyer package?!
debian/copyright misses a few files: Files: vidix/sysdep/pci_sco.c vidix/sysdep/pci_os2.c vidix/sysdep/pci_mach386.c vidix/sysdep/pci_netbsd.c vidix/sysdep/pci_386bsd.c vidix/cyberblade_regs.h vidix/sysdep/pci_lynx.c vidix/sysdep/pci_isc.c vidix/sysdep/pci_svr4.c vidix/sysdep/pci_freebsd.c vidix/sysdep/pci_linux.c vidix/sysdep/pci_win32.c vidix/sysdep/pci_openbsd.c License: ISC Files: vidix/sysdep/libdha_os2.c vidix/unichrome_regs.h License: Expat debian/control: You can use https for the homepage. Maybe add a few build-dependencies for additional features: libcrystalhd-dev [i386 amd64], libopus-dev, librtmp-dev, You can also drop the version requirement for libtheora-dev, which is satisfied in oldoldstable. Please multi-archify the package: * mencoder, mplayer, mplayer-gui, mplayer-doc - Multi-Arch: foreign * mplayer-dbg - Multi-Arch: same. Finally, you should update the mplayer, mplayer-gui and mencoder Suggests: ttf-freefont (transitional packgage) - fonts-freefont-ttf Otherwise it looks good. :-) Best regards, Andreas Thanks.:) All suggestions applied and pushed to git. Cheers, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Req. uploading of SoundTouch and mpg123
Hello all, I prepared new packages for soundtouch[1] and mpg123[2]. Could someone upload them? The changes are fairly minimal on both packages and they close a few Debian bugs. The new mpg123 version also closes several bugs in the Debian version found by upstream and is the current recommended version by upstream. Cheers, Miguel [1] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/soundtouch.git [2] git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-multimedia/mpg123.git ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#689659: mpg123 segfaults on specific file
Hello: I just tried the cut.mp3 file on an up to date amd64 Debian Sid system and it worked fine. $ mpg123 cut.mp3 High Performance MPEG 1.0/2.0/2.5 Audio Player for Layers 1, 2 and 3 version 1.14.4; written and copyright by Michael Hipp and others free software (LGPL/GPL) without any warranty but with best wishes Playing MPEG stream 1 of 1: cut.mp3 ... MPEG 1.0 layer III, 128 kbit/s, 44100 Hz joint-stereo Title: O SNEHURCE Artist: IVAN MLADEK Comment: Album: POHADKY A JINE POVIDACKY Year:1994Genre: Vocal Note: Illegal Audio-MPEG-Header 0xc7ae608a at offset 1251. Note: Trying to resync... Note: Skipped 159 bytes in input. Note: Illegal Audio-MPEG-Header 0xfffb at offset 32268. Note: Trying to resync... Note: Skipped 2 bytes in input. [0:02] Decoding of cut.mp3 finished. What I did notice was that the original user logs suggest that they are using Version 0.59o (1998/Feb/08). of mpg123. My logs show version 1.14.4 and that it worked with 1.14.4. I'm not sure why but it seems that there are several versions installed on this system or the system is not up to date. Hope this helps, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#689659: mpg123 segfaults on specific file
Miguel: What remains is my question about only i486 being built-in currently, is that intentional? Hello: The Debian i386 architecture is supposed to support all i486 and later. The current package of mpg123 gets compiled with --with-cpu=x86_dither since the previous maintainer (from what I remember right now). The other architectures use the default values for this parameter. If the parameter --with-cpu=x86 is better suited for i486 and later then it could be changed. Hope this answers the question. - Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#672824: FTBFS on sid: checking for mysql_init... no
Hello: It seems that this is related to bug #590905. The mysql_config file now contains the following line: libs_r= $ldflags -L$pkglibdir -lmysqlclient_r -lpthread -lz -lm -lrt -lssl -lcrypto -ldl And the package fails with: configure:12514: g++ -o conftest -g -O2 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat -Werror=format-security -I/usr/include/mysql -DBIG_JOINS=1 -fno-strict-aliasing -g -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -I/usr/include/mysql -DBIG_JOINS=1 -fno-strict-aliasing -g -Wl,-z,relro -lrt conftest.cpp -L/usr/lib/i386-gnu -lmysqlclient_r -lpthread -lz -lm -lrt -lssl -lcrypto -ldl 5 /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lssl /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lcrypto collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status Adding a build dependency to libssl-dev solves the FTBFS but libmysqlclient-dev should probably be the one depending on libssl-dev. Several packages FTBFS due to the missing ssl libraries and would need a source upload for something they don't really depend on. Since this affects the transition I also CC this to their tracker. Hope this helps, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Bug#670608: jackd2: Please transition libjack-jackd2-0 for multiarch
Source: jackd2 Version: 1.9.8~dfsg.3+20120418gitf82ec715-4 User: multiarch-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: multiarch Hello: Please make this package compatible with multiarch, as described at http://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation. More info: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/MultiArch Thanks, Miguel ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
