Bug#895055: ITP: python-sounddevice -- Python module to play and record sound
Dear Yaroslav, Am 06.04.18 um 21:47 schrieb Yaroslav Halchenko: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Yaroslav Halchenko * Package name: python-sounddevice Version : 0.3.10 Upstream Author : Matthias Geier * URL : http://python-sounddevice.readthedocs.io/ * License : MIT/X Programming Lang: Python Description : Python module to play and record sound This Python module provides bindings for the PortAudio library and a few convenience functions to play and record NumPy arrays containing audio signals. Needed for upcoming updated package of PsychoPy I also found an application requiring this Python library. The current version is 0.4.1 and probably the name now should be python3-sounddevice. Kind regards, Paul
Bug#582271: Looks as if the ITP for webm and libvpx are ITPs for the same software
Am Donnerstag, den 20.05.2010, 09:26 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Dröge: On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 04:22 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: for me it looks as if http://bugs.debian.org/582271 and http://bugs.debian.org/582286 are more or less about packaging the same software. (I'm though not sure so no merge by me, just a heads up. :-) Regards, Axel They are, thanks for noticing :) libvpx is the library name for the encoder/decoder, webm is the marketing name of the file format. A package for libvpx is already waiting in NEW. Thank you for all your great and quick work! I looked at [1], but I did not find a way to get the packages. I searched the Web on how to get or install packages from the NEW queue, but I just found that people offer those packages in a private archive/repository. Do you have such a repository or an archive? Thanks, Paul [1] http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/libvpx_0.9.0-4.html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#515793: Get cgit included with statically linked libgit.a?
Am Montag, den 15.03.2010, 12:47 -0700 schrieb Marc Singer: On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.comwrote: Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 15:51 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.com wrote: Am Dienstag, den 17.02.2009, 09:40 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ the blocking bug 407722 [1] is marked »wontfix« and judging from the answers on my question sent to the Git list (also cc-ed to [1]) it looks like the only option is to link statically against libgit. :( Can some Debian Developers please comment on this? And if no other solution is proposed could we get cgit included into the Debian package repository and with luck cgit might be available in Debian squeeze. I'm not optimistic that the git developers will support development against the library. It's really a shame since it would benefit some kinds of projects that are performance bound You are right, as can be seen by the replies to bug #407722 [1]. So we should deal with this situation and link against libgit statically. What do I miss? IMHO, that would be an unwise path. The GIT developers are committed to being able to change the interface. Seems like the design of cgit needs to change in order to move forward. I thought the replies from the Git developers to [1] (especially [2]) meant that it is ok to link it statically. What harm would it do if we link it statically. Would not that only affect cgit? Thanks, Paul PS: Could you please just send plain text messages? Evolution has some problems with quoting GMail HTML messages and it saves some bandwidth. ;-) [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=407722 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=407722#84 signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#515793: Get cgit included with statically linked libgit.a?
Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 15:51 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Paul Menzel pm.deb...@googlemail.comwrote: Am Dienstag, den 17.02.2009, 09:40 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ the blocking bug 407722 [1] is marked »wontfix« and judging from the answers on my question sent to the Git list (also cc-ed to [1]) it looks like the only option is to link statically against libgit. :( Can some Debian Developers please comment on this? And if no other solution is proposed could we get cgit included into the Debian package repository and with luck cgit might be available in Debian squeeze. I'm not optimistic that the git developers will support development against the library. It's really a shame since it would benefit some kinds of projects that are performance bound You are right, as can be seen by the replies to bug #407722 [1]. So we should deal with this situation and link against libgit statically. What do I miss? [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=407722 signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#515793: Get cgit included with statically linked libgit.a?
Dear Marc, Am Dienstag, den 17.02.2009, 09:40 -0800 schrieb Marc Singer: The upstream build of cgit requires a download of git to build libgit which this package links statically. Thus, this package practically depends on a change to git-core. http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/ the blocking bug 407722 [1] is marked »wontfix« and judging from the answers on my question sent to the Git list (also cc-ed to [1]) it looks like the only option is to link statically against libgit. :( Can some Debian Developers please comment on this? And if no other solution is proposed could we get cgit included into the Debian package repository and with luck cgit might be available in Debian squeeze. Thanks, Paul [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=407722 signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#469397: ITP: xbmc -- XBox Media Center Linux Port
Dear Andres, Am Montag, den 23.03.2009, 13:07 +0100 schrieb Paul Menzel: Am Freitag, den 30.01.2009, 02:14 -0500 schrieb Andres Mejia: Just thought I mention what needs to be done before xbmc can even be considered for upload to Debian (and just about any distro for that matter). So far, I've encountered two issues that need to be resolved before xbmc can be uploaded. 1. xbmc needs to use system libraries instead of the internal libraries provided in the source. 2. xbmc needs to follow the requirements of the FHS. I am currently working on the first issue. For anyone interested, you can checkout the changes I've implemented in their SVN repo under the external-libraries-support branch. I merge fairly frequently with the linuxport branch so that the only difference between the two branches is that one supports the use of external libraries. Any help is welcome. For anyone interested, here's a good place to start = http://xbmc.org/wiki/?title=XBMC_for_Linux Here's a place for any feedback on the external libraries support = http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/5416 Thank you very much for your work in getting XBMC packaged for Debian. Could you give a status update on your work? And even better could you provide packages in a private repository for testing? As you probably know there are also packages for Ubuntu available [1]. Do you guys work together to save work? As you probably know XBMC 9.04 (Babylon) Beta 1 was released some days ago [3]. XBMC could probably attract more users and get more testing, if it is packaged for Debian. Could you give us a status update, please? Thanks a lot, Paul [1] http://xbmc.org/forum/showthread.php?t=33327 [2] https://edge.launchpad.net/~team-xbmc-svn/+archive/ppa [3] http://xbmc.org/blog/2009/04/23/xbmc-904-babylon-beta-1-released/ signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#469397: ITP: xbmc -- XBox Media Center Linux Port
Dear Andres, Am Freitag, den 30.01.2009, 02:14 -0500 schrieb Andres Mejia: Just thought I mention what needs to be done before xbmc can even be considered for upload to Debian (and just about any distro for that matter). So far, I've encountered two issues that need to be resolved before xbmc can be uploaded. 1. xbmc needs to use system libraries instead of the internal libraries provided in the source. 2. xbmc needs to follow the requirements of the FHS. I am currently working on the first issue. For anyone interested, you can checkout the changes I've implemented in their SVN repo under the external-libraries-support branch. I merge fairly frequently with the linuxport branch so that the only difference between the two branches is that one supports the use of external libraries. Any help is welcome. For anyone interested, here's a good place to start = http://xbmc.org/wiki/?title=XBMC_for_Linux Here's a place for any feedback on the external libraries support = http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/5416 Thank you very much for your work in getting XBMC packaged for Debian. Could you give a status update on your work? And even better could you provide packages in a private repository for testing? As you probably know there are also packages for Ubuntu available [1]. Do you guys work together to save work? Thanks, Paul [1] http://xbmc.org/forum/showthread.php?t=33327 [2] https://edge.launchpad.net/~team-xbmc-svn/+archive/ppa signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#464848: Any news?
Dear Raphael, thanks for your work. I saw that the package is waiting in NEW right now. But I do not know where I can get the binary package from new. Am Samstag, den 24.05.2008, 22:08 -0500 schrieb Raphael Geissert: If you know how to build the package, it is available at git.debian.org. With the help from Guido Günther (Bug#484752) I succeeded in building the package with git-buildpackage. See [1] for instructions. I installed the package. In contrast to the Ubuntu package, X was not able to load the openchrome module (in Ubuntu the name is via) and I had to add Driver openchrome explicitly to /etc/X11/xorg.conf . Thanks a lot again, Paul [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Openchrome signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#464848: Any news?
Dear Raphael, sorry to bother you. Yesterday, I installed a new board with 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. K8M890 [Chrome9] Integrated Video (rev 11) Unfortunately the vesa driver did not support the correct setting, so that using X was not a great experience. I solved it by installing the Ubuntu packages and it works as expected. For more information take a look at [1]. You would be my hero ;) if you could get the package excepted. Thanks a lot, Paul [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Openchrome signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
