On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 02:51:23PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
I've re-read what you had written to at least try to understand what options
there there might be.
If possible, I'd like some clarification on what the zero-ice snafu in the
following statement means:
Hi,
On Tuesday 26 June 2012 23:33:39 Chris Knadle wrote:
I'm assuming all of the above is true under normal circumstnaces when CELT
0.7.1 support is included. However with libcelt0-0 removed, mumble version
1.2.3-349-g315b5f5-1 is unable to communicate via server loopback to the
majority of
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 08:59:57AM +0200, Nicos Gollan wrote:
Effectively, the standardisation process and related resolution of licensing
issues for the new codec are one of the things holding back a proper 1.2.4
release.
Whatever the real reasons for mumble upstream dragging its feet on
On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 04:57:13, Ron wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 08:59:57AM +0200, Nicos Gollan wrote:
...
So for reliable support, the safer bet would be to wait for 1.2.4; until
then, it's under development and may break in weird ways.
Which is not to say this part might not be
On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 08:59:25, Chris Knadle wrote:
...
On Wheezy, after doing a checkout of v1.2.3-348-g317f5a0-1 I'm unable to
get the package to build because there's no source tarball and debuild
reports that it can't build source format 3.0 (quilt) if the source
tarball is missing.
On Monday 25 June 2012 23:26:50 Chris Knadle wrote:
It seems unusual to CC ftpmaster in a bug report, but keeping the CC as
this is a reply to one that went there.
I won't, there are people you definitely don't want to be on the bad side of
;-)
On Sunday, June 24, 2012 21:36:28, Michael
Greetings Nicos. Thank you for your informative email.
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 09:08:45, Nicos Gollan wrote:
On Monday 25 June 2012 23:26:50 Chris Knadle wrote:
On Sunday, June 24, 2012 21:36:28, Michael Schmitt wrote:
...
If you manage to get it to build and run, in the configuration
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 03:51:14PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Because of all these sticky problems, without a clear path to proceed if I
were personally in the maintainer's shoes I'd probably take the do nothing
option and release the current 348 version that has the libcelt0-0 codec
that
On Monday, June 25, 2012 04:27:20, Ron wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 03:51:14PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Because of all these sticky problems, without a clear path to proceed if
I were personally in the maintainer's shoes I'd probably take the do
nothing option and release the current
It seems unusual to CC ftpmaster in a bug report, but keeping the CC as this
is a reply to one that went there.
On Sunday, June 24, 2012 21:36:28, Michael Schmitt wrote:
Am 24.06.2012 21:51, schrieb Chris Knadle:
On Saturday, June 23, 2012 15:54:07, Michael Schmitt wrote:
..
I'm a bit
Hi tcwardr...@gmail.com,
I confess I'm not entirely certain how to respond to this suggestion
of yours ...
If, on the one hand, you actually are a black-hat, who has put in the
effort to actually analyse this for your own benefit - then I tip my hat
to you and your art, and wish you all the
I'm a bit dissappointed by the reply you got back to this suggestion, so I'm
adding some thoughts concerning your idea.
On Saturday, June 23, 2012 15:54:07, Michael Schmitt wrote:
Hi folks,
I guess shipping both versions with wheezy is not a viable option? At
least I think that it would
Hi Chris,
Am 24.06.2012 21:51, schrieb Chris Knadle:
I'm a bit dissappointed by the reply you got back to this suggestion, so I'm
adding some thoughts concerning your idea.
*Many* thanks for taking my mail seriously, which the maintainer
obviously did not. And yes, I am also rather
Hi folks,
I guess shipping both versions with wheezy is not a viable option? At
least I think that it would make sense. Disclaimer in the readme,
explanation of the situation, if a major security exploit does surface
(a mumble-client-crash is not a major security risk imho), remove that
On Thursday, June 21, 2012 00:57:23, Chris Knadle wrote:
On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 08:20:39 PM Chris Knadle wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 22:59:40, micah anderson wrote:
Is the situation that all users that are at 1.2.3-348 and older can
speak to each other and all users that are at
On Monday, June 18, 2012 22:59:40, micah anderson wrote:
Is the situation that all users that are at 1.2.3-348 and older can
speak to each other and all users that are at 1.2.3-349 and greater can
speak to each other, but =349 cannot speak to =348 users?
I did some testing of Mumble
On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 08:20:39 PM Chris Knadle wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2012 22:59:40, micah anderson wrote:
Is the situation that all users that are at 1.2.3-348 and older can
speak to each other and all users that are at 1.2.3-349 and greater can
speak to each other, but =349
Hi micah,
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:59:40PM -0400, micah anderson wrote:
Is the situation that all users that are at 1.2.3-348 and older can
speak to each other and all users that are at 1.2.3-349 and greater can
speak to each other, but =349 cannot speak to =348 users?
If so, is the
Is the situation that all users that are at 1.2.3-348 and older can
speak to each other and all users that are at 1.2.3-349 and greater can
speak to each other, but =349 cannot speak to =348 users?
If so, is the intended plan for everyone to bump up to =349?
If that is true, at the very least
19 matches
Mail list logo
