Processing of x265_1.9-3_amd64.changes

[Debian FTP Masters]

x265_1.9-3_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  x265_1.9-3.dsc
  x265_1.9-3.debian.tar.xz
  libx265-doc_1.9-3_all.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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

x265_1.9-3_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

[Debian FTP Masters]

Accepted:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:31:40 +0100
Source: x265
Binary: x265 libx265-dev libx265-79 libx265-doc
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.9-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers 

Changed-By: Sebastian Ramacher 
Description:
 libx265-79 - H.265/HEVC video stream encoder (shared library)
 libx265-dev - H.265/HEVC video stream encoder (development files)
 libx265-doc - H.265/HEVC video stream encoder (documentation)
 x265   - H.265/HEVC video stream encoder
Changes:
 x265 (1.9-3) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Upload to unstable.
Checksums-Sha1:
 a385224afe7e437a724c0906c7204dc38e07e697 2188 x265_1.9-3.dsc
 871157686cd1f3b9ef41ae8104c3055cc6c356b8 9744 x265_1.9-3.debian.tar.xz
 6f039c0825aae47301c444e5233cd0a8bbcd4f5d 79278 libx265-doc_1.9-3_all.deb
Checksums-Sha256:
 2c92827504e3b7486d46dd7ec559495dc1664457914a1c756f16b8d0d7b9c070 2188 
x265_1.9-3.dsc
 a1c184c22f21581dcd3174ad91564696f9ca601e2b4dfa0b4dd0461815e3 9744 
x265_1.9-3.debian.tar.xz
 35eb2a5fc54072a0c9197a2c93bcf12db853f8b5fccbde071e670b560460 79278 
libx265-doc_1.9-3_all.deb
Files:
 624fc11c689f17531d86c0db64a2d891 2188 video optional x265_1.9-3.dsc
 fbb0604c5d32cb556ae0650eca120cdd 9744 video optional x265_1.9-3.debian.tar.xz
 951e0bd803b12e3c74735f7a67c019a6 79278 doc optional libx265-doc_1.9-3_all.deb

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=BLN4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

___
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#814374: Acknowledgement (aeolus: Segmentation fault on startup)

[Alexandre DENIS]

Some additional info. Since the bug seems related to libfreetype, I
tried to downgrade libfreetype6 to stable (2.5.2-3+deb8u1). It made
aeolus work again.

However I'm not sure whether the bug is in libfreetype6 or in the way
aeolus uses it.



pgpf994lfKrQ5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital 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

Processed: Re: Bug#813497: closed by Bálint Réczey (reply to bal...@balintreczey.hu) (Re: Bug#813497: kodi: Segfault on Startup)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> fixed -1 15.2+dfsg1-3
Bug #813497 {Done: Bálint Réczey } [kodi] kodi: 
Segfault on StartUp
Marked as fixed in versions kodi/15.2+dfsg1-3.

-- 
813497: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813497
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Bug#813497: closed by Bálint Réczey (reply to bal...@balintreczey.hu) (Re: Bug#813497: kodi: Segfault on Startup)

[Bálint Réczey]

Control: fixed -1 15.2+dfsg1-3

2016-02-11 1:53 GMT+01:00 Alessio Treglia :
> Please close again this bug by specifying the version it is no longer
> reproducible.
Most probably it was current version.
Please change it if that's not the case.

Cheers,
Balint

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

Processed: Re: Bug#813497: closed by Bálint Réczey (reply to bal...@balintreczey.hu) (Re: Bug#813497: kodi: Segfault on Startup)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

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

> notfound 813497 15.2+dfsg1-3
Bug #813497 {Done: Bálint Réczey } [kodi] kodi: 
Segfault on StartUp
No longer marked as found in versions kodi/15.2+dfsg1-3.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
813497: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813497
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: Request for review & inclusion: sonic-pi (see #796550)

[Hanno Zulla]

Hello Sebastian,

thanks for the review.

I believe to have fixed all issues you have listed in your review.

Except one:

> I: sonic-pi: spelling-error-in-binary

Those are not spelling errors, lintian is spellchecking the translated
non-English document resources here, which are linked into the Qt
application binary during build.

Please give



a second try and be patient with my packaging effort. :-)

Regards,

Hanno

___
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: Request for review & inclusion: sonic-pi (see #796550)

[Debian/GNU]

On 02/11/2016 05:03 PM, Hanno Zulla wrote:
> Hello Sebastian,
> 
> thanks for the review.
> 
> I believe to have fixed all issues you have listed in your review.
> 
> Except one:
> 
>> I: sonic-pi: spelling-error-in-binary
> 
> Those are not spelling errors, lintian is spellchecking the translated
> non-English document resources here, which are linked into the Qt
> application binary during build.

then please add a lintian-override documenting the reason.

fsae
IOhannes



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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

Re: Request for review & inclusion: sonic-pi (see #796550)

[Sebastian Ramacher]

Hi Hanno

On 2016-02-11 17:03:04, Hanno Zulla wrote:
> I believe to have fixed all issues you have listed in your review.

nocheck[1] is not honored. You'll need something like the following:

override_dh_auto_test:
ifeq (,$(filter nocheck,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
# run the tests here
endif

dh_auto_test at the end of the override does not seem to run anything, so there
is no need to keep it.

Cheers

[1] Sorry, I wrote notests in my last review. That was obviously wrong.
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


signature.asc
Description: 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

Re: preparing new RtMidi release, question about SO version

[Debian/GNU]

On 02/10/2016 06:21 PM, Stephen Sinclair wrote:
> Previous versions have made the error of treating SO version like the
> version number, and producing binaries e.g. librtmidi.so.2.1.0.
> 
> I was recommending changing this to properly reflect ABI
> compatibility.  What would Debian maintainers prefer here?
> 
> I proposed making the new SO version 3.0.0, to really emphasize that
> the ABI version is new, however since it's a bugfix release I don't
> know if that's the recommended strategy.

the question is: *is* the ABI new? has it changed?
just because you decided to switch to semantic versioning doesn't
necessarily change the ABI.

i would suggest to not do a soname bump for anything *but* ABI changes.

there's a good overview about when you should (not) bump which of the
various numbers on [http://semver.org/]

> 
> https://github.com/thestk/rtmidi/pull/59
> 
> In any case I notice that the interface has changed a bit, e.g. some
> functions have lost parameters, others have new parameters, since the
> last release.

otoh, if functions *have* changed you are breaking the ABI.

if this was a C-library, then adding/removing function parameters would
not change the exported symbols, so any application built with the
previous version the lib would still successfully "load" when run-time
linked against the new version.
however, since the function semantics have changed, you would get
spurious and hard to debug crashes. (warranting a soname bump to prevent
old application accidentally using the new library).

since this is a C++-library, changing the function arguments will
effectively change the exported symbol names;
therefore an application built with the old library will simply fail to
load (since the symbols won't resolve).
this is great as it explicitely tells you that you need a soname bump.

there are a few Debian packages that can help you tracking ABI changes.


gfmsdr
IOhannes







signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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

Processing of juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes

[Debian FTP Masters]

juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  juce_4.1.0+repack-1.dsc
  juce_4.1.0+repack.orig.tar.gz
  juce_4.1.0+repack-1.debian.tar.xz
  juce-modules-source_4.1.0+repack-1_all.deb
  juce-utils-dbgsym_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  juce-utils_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  libjuce-dev_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  libjuce-doc_4.1.0+repack-1_all.deb
  libjuce0-dbgsym_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  libjuce0_4.1.0+repack-1_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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Re: Request for review & inclusion: sonic-pi (see #796550)

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

I had a look at the package in git, and in general it look good.

I missed some hints in the debian/changelog file about why the version
is a repack, and where details on the packaging can be found (ie a
reference to debian/README.source).  The changelog is one of the first
things I check, at least, and I suspect the ftpmasters doing the package
review is going to start there and move on to the copyright file shortly
thereafter. :)

I see in the rules file you use 'cd app/gui/qt; make clean' instead of
'make -C app/gui/qt clean.  I suspect -C is a better way to do this.
Some of the clean target should possibly be sent upstream as a patch to
get the upstream clean target to remove all generated files.

I would be happy to upload/sponsor the package as it is, but suspect it
stand a better chance in the ftpmaster review if the changelog explain a
bit about the repacking and points to the README.source file.

-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen

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

juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes is NEW

[Debian FTP Masters]

binary:juce-modules-source is NEW.
binary:juce-utils is NEW.
binary:libjuce-dev is NEW.
binary:libjuce-doc is NEW.
binary:libjuce0 is NEW.
source:juce is NEW.

Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient.

Packages are routinely processed through to the archive, and do feel
free to browse the NEW queue[1].

If there is an issue with the upload, you will receive an email from a
member of the ftpteam.

If you have any questions, you may reply to this email.

[1]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html

___
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#814011: yoshimi: FTBFS with gcc-6: multiple errors

[Will Godfrey]

The current 'master' has bugfixes that should clear these. However I haven't
issued a bugfix release as we will probably release V 1.3.9 long before GCC 6
becomes a done-deal, and I don't want to create unnecessary churn.

-- 
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.

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

juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Scott Kitterman]

Maintainer request.

===

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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Processing of juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes

[Debian FTP Masters]

juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  juce_4.1.0+repack-1.dsc
  juce_4.1.0+repack.orig.tar.gz
  juce_4.1.0+repack-1.debian.tar.xz
  introjucer-dbgsym_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  introjucer_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  juce-modules-source_4.1.0+repack-1_all.deb
  libjuce-dev_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  libjuce-doc_4.1.0+repack-1_all.deb
  libjuce0-dbgsym_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.deb
  libjuce0_4.1.0+repack-1_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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

juce_4.1.0+repack-1_amd64.changes is NEW

[Debian FTP Masters]

binary:introjucer is NEW.
binary:juce-modules-source is NEW.
binary:libjuce-dev is NEW.
binary:libjuce-doc is NEW.
binary:libjuce0 is NEW.
source:juce is NEW.

Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient.

Packages are routinely processed through to the archive, and do feel
free to browse the NEW queue[1].

If there is an issue with the upload, you will receive an email from a
member of the ftpteam.

If you have any questions, you may reply to this email.

[1]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html

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