Bug#620427: debian bug 620427

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi,

As

http://subversion.ffado.org/wiki/HostControllers

your fw controller is ok for ffado. And aggregate too.

Can you reproduce problem in more recents debian versions of package?


Regards,
--
marciotex

Bug#330601: ITP: libiec61883 -- an partial implementation of IEC 61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

On 6/20/06, Sebastian Dröge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,
is there any progress on this?


Hi Sebastian.

There is progress: package is done:

deb http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable main
contrib non-free

Maybe you want look:

http://freebob.sourceforge.net/index.php/FreeBoB_on_Debian_GNU/Linux

I'm waiting sponsor for packages, since I'm not debian developer.


Bye



Regards,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
skype: marcio.tex
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
 http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#350878: can I help you?

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi free

I'm interested in this package. Is there news about this? Need you
help? I'm using 2.6.17-rt7 and obtaining 2ms latency with freebob.

Regards,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
skype: marcio.tex
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
 http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#350878: experimental version ready

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi free

Experimental version of package is ready. You can test it and upload
it. However, there is a problem. The patch works for 2.6.17 but not
for 2.6.17.1 or
later. So, I am trying package a patch for 2.6.17.0, sure?

The question is: how can I constraint patch this way? I  tried

KVERSIONS=(2.6.17)
KVERSIONS=(2.6.17.0)
KVERSIONS=(2.6.17-0)

in kpatches. None of them works. With 2.6.17, patch was applied in source
2.6.17-2). With 2.6.17.0 and 2.6.17-0:

marciotex:/usr/src/linux# /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/apply/rtpreem
No "Realtime Preemption" patch found for kernel version 2.6.17

Know you what's solution?

Thanks in advance,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
skype: marcio.tex
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net

http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://marciotex.googlepages.com/
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#326691: ITP: freebob -- FreeBoB aims to provide a free driver implemenation for the BeBob

[Marcio Teixeira]

2005/9/5, Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 04-Sep-05, 22:02 (CDT), Marcio Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Package: wnpp
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Owner: Marcio Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> > * Package name: freebob
> >   Version : 0.0.1
> >   Upstream Author : Pieter Palmers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * URL : http://freebob.sourceforge.net/index.php/Main_Page
> > https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-freebob/
> > * License :  LGPL
> >   Description : FreeBoB aims to provide a free driver implemenation for 
> > the BeBob
> 
> Don't repeat the package name in the short description. How about:
> 
> Description: a free driver for BeBob IEEE 1394 breakout boxes

Ok.

Thanks.
 
> Steve
> --
> Steve Greenland
> The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
> system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
> world.   -- seen on the net
> 


-- 
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
  http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#326691: ITP: freebob -- FreeBoB aims to provide a free dr iver implemenation for the BeBob

[Marcio Teixeira]

2005/9/5, Humberto Massa Guimarães <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

[cut]

> Oi Marcio,

Oi :)
 
> I still don't get what this is or does based on your description.
> 
> --
> HTH,
> Massa

Is this better?

BeBoB is BridgeCo (http://www.bridgeco.net) enhanced Breakout Box
Firmware for breakout boxes like FireWire Solo,  PHASE 24, FIREPOD,
etc. BeBoB is used in many available IEEE 1394 based  break out boxes.

FreeBoB aims to provide a free driver implemenation for the BeBoB.

Regards,
-- 
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
  http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#304890: libraw1394-5: new upstream release available

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi

I'm working on FreeBoB Debian packaging:

http://freebob.sourceforge.net/index.php/Main_Page (upstream project)
https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-freebob
http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org

For buil FreeBoB, libraw1394 must be updated: we need version > or =
1.2.0. The problem: on unstable, version is 1.1.0. By this reason, I'm
working on new upstream (1.2.0, svn rev 154):

deb http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable main
deb-src http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable main

I need last svn snapshot. But (svn|www).linux1394.org is down. So,
could something send me it?.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
-- 
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
  http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#304890: libraw1394-8 (svn rev 160) unofficial Debian package released

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi

First release with new upstream available. These are sources.list lines:

deb http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable/
deb-src http://pkg-freebob.alioth.debian.org/debian unstable/

Note: this is not official release. Not yet :). I'm not libraw1394
Debian mantainer.

Regards,
-- 
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

endereço eletrônico: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
chave pública: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
  http://www.marciotex.pro.br/keypub_8709626B.asc
página pessoal (em construção): http://www.marciotex.pro.br
Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNULinux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#330601: Sponsoring of libiec61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

On 9/17/06, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi Marcio,


Hi Loïc. Thanks for your interest. Yes, I need sponsor. libiec61883
depends libraw1394, uploaded recently. Please, wait fews days for I
update libiec61883. If you want, my svn repo is

svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/pkg-freebob/libiec61883

or

svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/pkg-freebob/libiec61883/trunk

for trunk.


 I see you prepared packages for libiec61883 to address #330601.  I've
 read an objection concerning the name of the library package which you
 seem to have addressed already.


Yes, I hope is ok.


I'm one of the GStreamer maintainers,
 and we are currently waiting for libiec61883 to upload a new upstream
 release of gst-plugins-good which requires this library.

 If you didn't find a sponsor yet, please let me know, and I'll review
 and sponsor your package.  If you need help, please let me know as
 well.


Great. Thank you very much. I'm a newbie and so, I will need your help, sure.


   Bye,
--
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



Thanks in advance,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

skype: marcio.tex
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/

chave pública:
hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc

Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNU Linux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#330601: Sponsoring of libiec61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi.

My english is bad. Sorry for inconveniences.

On 9/18/06, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 18, 2006, Marcio Teixeira wrote:
Hi Loïc. Thanks for your interest. Yes, I need sponsor. libiec61883
> depends libraw1394, uploaded recently.

 Yes.

>Please, wait fews days for I
> update libiec61883.

 Hmm, what are you waiting for?  builds?  Looks fine now:
 http://people.debian.org/~igloo/status.php?email=&packages=libraw1394&arches=

 Perhaps you meant to replace libraw1394-8-dev with libraw1394-dev in
 your debian/control?


Yes. Done.


> Great. Thank you very much. I'm a newbie and so, I will need your help,
> sure.

 Ok, so first I see you did not start from the Ubuntu packaging or
 changed it.  That's ok, it's your time, but it might save you some time
 to look there first for the next packages.  :)
   Anyway, the Ubuntu packaging has some issues, so it's fine to rewrite
 it.  You did more mistakes though.  ;-)


Ok.


 Here are the issues I see with your packaging:

(required) 1) Your copyright claims:
 http://www.linux1394.org/dl/libiec61883-1.0.0.tar.gz
 this would have to be updated for each release, please only mention the
 base path, <http://www.linux1394.org/dl/>


Done.


(required) 2) You need the copyright years at some point.  For example:
  Copyright 2004 Mister Foo
  Copyright 2005-2006 Mister Bar
 or simply:
  Copyright 2004-2006  Mister Foo, Mister Bar, ...
 Do a recursive grep on the source to get a list of copyright years, and
 at it at the top of copyright.


Done.

A doubt: I did not find this condition into Debian Policy. Is required
by Debian Policy or your Policy :) ?


 3) the current SVN has changes with respect to the upstream tarball, I
 don't see why these changes are made directly in the source when you
 use a patch system.  Modern packages use a patch system, and I suggest
 you keep only the debian/ in SVN.  The teams I'm in all do this, have a
 look at svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-gnome/desktop/unstable or
 svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-gstreamer/unstable if you like.
   This is not required, and I only suggest you make your own opinion.
 I think it's best to only keep debian/ in SVN, but I know some people
 do it like you do.
   This makes it a bit harder for me to review the delta between your
 package and upstream for example.


Your approach is more elegant, I know. But I feel me more comfortable
so. In future, maybe I change.


   Also, I see you wrote a get-orig-source target which will
 relibtoolize the source (run autotools), I don't think it's a good
 reason to repack the tarball.  Tarballs are typically repacked to strip
 off non-free stuff.  I use patches for this instead, search for
 70_relibtoolize patches in pkg-gnome for example.  Please tell me why
 you repack the source.


You are right. I'm working in new upstream source release, without
repack it. Can you say me where is 70_relibtoolize patches?


 4) Debhelper compatibility level 4.  4 is slightly deprecated, 5 is
 supposed to be the norm, especially for new packages.  But I'm fine
 with this.


Ok. updated to Level 5


 5) Package: libiec61883-0-dev
 Provides: libiec61883-dev
 Conflicts: libiec61883-dev
 I see no reason why you would want to do this in Debian, particularly
 since the Ubuntu package is named libiec61883-dev, this seems to
 introduce an incompatibility.  Could you explain why you want this
 name?


Looks like more safe. See it:

http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#id271662

What do you think about?



 6) Please add ${misc:Depends} to your Depends, even if this results in
 a warning, this is a safer setup.


Done.


 7) The get-orig-source is awful, it's a shell script wrapped in
 makefile.  Makefile are like shell scripts with the "set -e" flag, so
 there's no need to use && \ between lines.  If you want to embed a long
 shell script like this one in the future, use a separate file, eg
 debian/get-orig-source.sh.  In this particular case, I don't think you
 should repack the tarball at all, but if you still want to do so, you
 might want to rely on "uscan" instead (that's what the watch file is
 for after all).


Ok. I don't repack.


(required) 8) Don't hardcode the package version, like in
 DEB_PKG_VERSION := 1.0.0.  You can use dpkg-parsechangelog to retrieve
 the needed information.  Grep the debian/rules in pkg-gnome for
 examples.


Ok. get-orig target removed.



 Please fix the "required" items above and point me to the updated
 package.  You may or may not fix the non-required stuff, but please
 repond to the questions.


I'm working in new upstream source release without repack it. When OK,
I say you.


   Thanks,

--
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




Thank you very much, Lo

Bug#330601: [URGENT] Bug#330601: Sponsoring of libiec61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi Loïc

On 9/28/06, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Marcio,

 This is an urgent matter: the freeze of Debian testing is close.  The
 release announced an even deeper freeze today.

 I talked with the release team, and they said that if the package is
 accepted rapidly by the ftpmasters, it still has a chance to enter
 testing.
   So, I'm going ahead and fixing the last points I mentionned
 concerning your packaging.

 I'm sorry.  Would I be in your position, chance are good I would be
 upset; please don't be.
   I wish you continue the maintenance of libiec61883 starting now, and
 of other packages if you like.

 I would like to underline that is an exceptional situation.  Sorry
 again for the rushed upload.


No problems, Loïc, I understand. You did right thing. Don't worry :)

About continue the maintenance of libiec61883, I want do it. I'm
working in libfreebob, too. Would be cool upload it (when ok).

Do you want write permissions into svn?


   Bye,

PS: I'm attaching you the "svn diff" of my changes.  The packages I
uploaded to NEW are at:

NEW is at:

--
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>





Thanks,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

skype: marcio.tex
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/

chave pública:
hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc

Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNU Linux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#330601: Sponsoring of libiec61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

On 9/28/06, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi again,

 Now to reply to your questions:

On Thu, Sep 28, 2006, Marcio Teixeira wrote:
> > Perhaps you meant to replace libraw1394-8-dev with libraw1394-dev in
> > your debian/control?
> Yes. Done.

 Actually, there were still the Depends to update.


Ok.


> >   Anyway, the Ubuntu packaging has some issues, so it's fine to rewrite
> > it.  You did more mistakes though.  ;-)
> Ok.

 The second pass is way better.  I compared the Ubuntu packaging byte by
 byte with yours for compatibility reasons, and you have nicer
 descriptions, and packaging now.

> > Do a recursive grep on the source to get a list of copyright years, and
> > at it at the top of copyright.
> Done.

 I Noticed a small problem with the version of the LGPL which I
 addressed.


Ok


> A doubt: I did not find this condition into Debian Policy. Is required
> by Debian Policy or your Policy :) ?

 It's a requirement of US copyright laws IIRC, and it's a thing that the
 Debian ftpmasters check, but it's not very strict.  It's best to have
 it.


Ok. Real life, not doc life :)


> >   This makes it a bit harder for me to review the delta between your
> > package and upstream for example.
> Your approach is more elegant, I know. But I feel me more comfortable
> so. In future, maybe I change.

 This seems fixed now.

> You are right. I'm working in new upstream source release, without
> repack it. Can you say me where is 70_relibtoolize patches?

 If you checkout
 svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-gnome/desktop/unstable, you should
 see:
 bee% find . -iname \*relibtoolize\*
 ./gedit/debian/patches/70_relibtoolize.patch
 ./at-spi/debian/patches/70_relibtoolize.patch
 ./libart-lgpl/debian/patches/001_relibtoolize.patch


Ok. I wiil take a look


 etc.

 My procedure is at:
<http://people.dooz.org/~lool/debian/relibtoolize>


Ok. I will try follow it.


> > 4) Debhelper compatibility level 4.  4 is slightly deprecated, 5 is
> > supposed to be the norm, especially for new packages.  But I'm fine
> > with this.
> Ok. updated to Level 5

 You need to build-dep on debhelper >= 5 to have it though.


Ok


> > 5) Package: libiec61883-0-dev
> > Provides: libiec61883-dev
> > Conflicts: libiec61883-dev
> > I see no reason why you would want to do this in Debian, particularly
> > since the Ubuntu package is named libiec61883-dev, this seems to
> > introduce an incompatibility.  Could you explain why you want this
> > name?
> Looks like more safe. See it:
> 
http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#id271662
> What do you think about?

 I changed it to be libiec61883-dev.  I think it's ok to use
 libiec61883-dev for the first version of the API, but I didn't have the
 time to think too long about it and I wanted to retain compatibility
 wiht Ubuntu.

 We can switch to this scheme with the next API change.


Ok


> I'm working in new upstream source release without repack it. When OK,
> I say you.

 It was nicely packaged, really.

 (Except I would remove the comment from the watch file :-P)


:)


   Bye,
--
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



Bye
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

skype: marcio.tex
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/

chave pública:
hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc

Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNU Linux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#330601: ITP: libiec61883 -- an partial implementation of IEC 61883

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi

There is a reason:

http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#naminglibpkg

Regards,

On 8/14/06, Sebastian Dröge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Nice... Any reason why you didn't choose the same package names as
marillat / debian-multimedia[1] did? This would make it easier for users
to upgrade to the official Debian version.

Bye

[1]http://mirrors.ecology.uni-kiel.de/debian/debian-multimedia/pool/main/libi/libiec61883/






--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

skype: marcio.tex
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/

chave pública:
hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc

Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNU Linux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil

Bug#400290: jack-audio-connection-kit: debian/rules clean error

[Marcio Teixeira]

Hi.

Thanks for answer.


On 11/29/06, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 09:36:50PM -0200, Marcio Roberto Teixeira wrote:
> Package: jack-audio-connection-kit
> Version: 0.102.20-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: no longer builds from source

> clean target don't run properly. This problem is effect of cdbs bug:

> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=387103

It seems unlikely to me that this bug would only affect jack.  Should this
bug really be reassigned to cdbs and merged with 387103, raising the
severity of that other bug?


This bug affect jack but not only jack. It's ok to me your decision.


--
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/



Regards,
--
Marcio Roberto Teixeira

skype: marcio.tex
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/

chave pública:
hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net
http://marciotex.googlepages.com/keypub_8709626B.asc

Usuário "tchê" Debian/GNU Linux

Porto Alegre - RS - Brasil