Re: [SCM] supercollider/master: Fixing FIXMEs in copyright file. Note: the fixes match up with changes I've made upstream, with the declarations clarified for minor release 3.4.4, out v soon.
2011/6/13 Jonas Smedegaard : > On 11-06-13 at 05:28pm, Dan S wrote: >> 2011/6/13 Jonas Smedegaard : >> > On 11-06-13 at 01:22pm, Dan S wrote: >> >> 2011/6/13 Jonas Smedegaard : >> >> > On 11-06-13 at 03:14am, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 22:40, Jonas Smedegaard >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Actually, for "*" the listing of "Copyright: 2002-2003, James >> >> >> >> McCartney" is out of date. I would change it to "Copyright: >> >> >> >> 2002-2011, James McCartney and others" - that OK? There are many >> >> >> >> dozens of code contributors so I hope "others" is not too weird. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "others" is not a legal entity. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > What needs to be listed in Files sections is the actual copyright >> >> >> > holders, not all contributors. >> >> >> >> >> >> There is not full consensus around this idea. If one can be >> >> >> reasonably sure that the work is under the listed license, my >> >> >> personal take on the subject is that one lists all the copyright >> >> >> holders on a best effort basis. It can perfectly be possible, >> >> >> especially with large and relatively old packages, that names are >> >> >> forgotten/lost. That doesn't mean the package is not fit for debian >> >> >> because the copyright file cannot list all copyright holders. >> >> >> >> >> >> In other words, I believe it is acceptable to put "others" in the >> >> >> Files sections, when filling the complete list is too hard. >> >> > >> >> > I did not write that all others need to be documented. >> >> > >> >> > On the contrary, when those others are contributors without holding >> >> > copyright, I believe they need not be listed. >> >> >> >> OK. This can be implemented simply by using the names given in the >> >> copyright statements, as has been done in the package at present. >> >> However, there are quite a few contributors who have made >> >> contributions of sufficient complexity (etc) to claim copyright, but >> >> who didn't bother to change the copyright notices. Should I ignore >> >> them, or what? I could say "it's their fault for not claiming their >> >> copyright" but at least in my country (UK) you don't need to claim >> >> copyright in order to have it, so in a sense I should attribute them >> >> even if they forgot to attribute themselves. >> >> >> >> To be honest, I guess it's probably OK as-is (without "others"), >> >> though it does feel a little unrepresentative. >> > >> > That is new info to me, and changes the game! >> > >> > As Debian maintainer, when you are well aware that additional copyright >> > holders exist then they should be properly listed in debian/copyright. >> > >> > Best way to do that is to convince upstream (i.e. yourself with another >> > hat on) to explicitly list all copyright holders as such in headers of >> > corresponding code files. >> > >> > There are (sub-optimal!) alternatives. One is to only list them in >> > debian/copyright (i.e. not bother as upstream - affecting other >> > distributors). Another is as upstream to summarize in README or >> > CONTRIBUTORS or AUTHORS or similar, and as Debian maintainer copy that >> > chunk into debian/copyright. >> > >> > I do not consider it acceptable for Debian distribution to just list >> > some copyright holders as "...and others". Feel free to disagree with >> > me - I am not the law here, just very interested in perfecting these >> > texts, to most properly honour those contributing to the FLOSS world. >> > You can consult debian-legal@ or you can take your chances and hope >> > ftpmasters do not spot the issues and block based on it. >> >> That's fine - grateful for your opinion. SuperCollider does have an >> AUTHORS file (44 entries), which I think represents certainly the >> majority of copyright-holders very well. Shall I use that for the "*" >> rule, do you think? It feels appropriate to me. > > It does not feel appropriate to me to only list "the majority". The > majority of contributors, sure, but IMO Debian packaging needs all > copyright holders. Fair enough - it gives me a nudge to update the AUTHORS file upstream too, since we've had new developers joining. I've pushed an update with all copyright holders. Dan ___ 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 jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.changes
jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: jalv_0~svn3395-1.dsc jalv_0~svn3395.orig.tar.bz2 jalv_0~svn3395-1.debian.tar.gz jalv_0~svn3395-1_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: [SCM] supercollider/master: Update copyright with full dates+authors (largely from SCM analysis)
On 11-06-14 at 08:53am, danstowell-gu...@users.alioth.debian.org wrote: > Update copyright with full dates+authors (largely from SCM analysis) Great! I suggest updating upstream header statements as well, both for the benefit of other users than Debian, and also to ease continuous copyright tracking in Debian. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: 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
jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.changes is NEW
(new) jalv_0~svn3395-1.debian.tar.gz optional sound (new) jalv_0~svn3395-1.dsc optional sound (new) jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.deb optional sound tool to run LV2 plugins as stand-alone applications jalv is a stand-alone version of lv2jack that supports plugin UIs via libsuil. It allows one to run an LV2 plugin as a JACK application. . This package contains a replacement for the lv2jack utility, which was previously provided by the lilv-utils package. (new) jalv_0~svn3395.orig.tar.bz2 optional sound Changes: jalv (0~svn3395-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release. (Closes: #630391) Override entries for your package: Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 630391 Your package contains new components which requires manual editing of the override file. It is ok otherwise, so please be patient. New packages are usually added to the override file about once a week. You may have gotten the distribution wrong. You'll get warnings above if files already exist in other distributions. ___ 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 sponsorship for pd-hid
On Jun 13, 2011, at 8:01 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 14:43, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 22:15, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 19:30 +, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 02:45, Hans-Christoph Steiner > wrote: On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 17:41 -0300, "Felipe Sateler" > wrote: On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 21:55, Felipe Sateler > wrote: On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 19:08, Felipe Sateler > wrote: On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 03:37, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 15:37 -0800, "Hans-Christoph Steiner" wrote: On Dec 24, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 21:13, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Just ITPed, packaged and uploaded pd-hid to git.debian.org. It is an object for Pure Data that allows you to use USB HID devices in Pd. The build system is similar in structure to pd-plugin and pd-freeverb, plus it includes the kFreeBSD and Hurd updates, so it should build on all platforms. It depends on pd-mapping and recommends pd- pddp, which are both in NEW. http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-multimedia/pd-hid.git;a=summary There is some code that is not yours, please add Jan Truetzschler Falkenstein to the debian/copyright file (ftpmaster may reject the package for this missing information). Thanks for spotting that, I pushed the fix. Ping. Anyone willing to sponsor this one? Sorry, I lost track of this. I will try to get to this (and your other packages) during the weekend. I clearly didn't do this when promised, and this week I couldn't either. I've been extremely busy. I'm sorry about that. If someone else can look into these packages, please upload them, since I'm not likely to get any debian time anytime soon. I will, if nobody else gets to these packages, still review them as time permits. It seems that this package never got uploaded. It needs its git-dch done and the changelog finalized and then uploaded. I can finalize the changelog if that makes it easier. It seems some people want to do it themselves when uploading. I believe this package needs to be fixed for puredata >= 0.43 As far as I can tell it has already. For me, it builds on Debian/testing using puredata-dev and no puredata, and squeeze using puredata 0.42.6. Indeed, it seems to work. I have a licensing question though. The package is distributed as GPLv3+. However, Supercollider (where some code was borrowed) is GPLv2+. I think debian/copyright should document that fact. Code from 2004 cannot possibly be under GPLv3+ unless relicensed. The GPLv2+ license has that built into it. In the context of this project, the code from SuperCollider is so intermingled, there is no easily recognizable chunk that could be labeled GPLv2+. Since the project is GPLv3+, I think it would be misleading to try to say that a file is available under GPLv2+. If people want the GPLv2+ file, they should go to the original SuperCollider source. Here's the text from the GPL: "Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. " Indeed, I'm not questioning that. My point is that the objective of debian/copyright is documenting, not relicensing, even if it is permissible. From what I've seen, debian/copyright is not finer grained than files. The GPLv2+ code is mixed into two different files that are mostly GPLv3+. So if looking on a per-file basis, all of the files are GPLv3+. .hc Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to realize his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them, or perish.-William Carlos Williams ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
fil-plugins 0.3.0-2 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the fil-plugins source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 0.3.0-1 Current version: 0.3.0-2 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
dvblast 1.2-2 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the dvblast source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 1.2-1 Current version: 1.2-2 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ 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: please upload pd-bassemu, pd-beatpipe, pd-boids, pd-cyclone, pd-earplug, pd-ext13, d-ggee, pd-hcs, pd-libdir, pd-motex, pd-pddp, pd-vbap
On Jun 13, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 15:20, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Here are my lowest priority uploads, but I hope to get them uploaded in time to be included in Ubuntu/oneiric. An easier fix to all these RC bugs would be to get someone to upload the 'puredata' package from collab-maint/puredata.git. IOhannes and I have been asking the maintainers to upload for weeks, but they are unresponsive. So perhaps an NMU would be appropriate. What are the changes in puredata? Is there a bug filed? I'm speaking on behalf of the work of IOhannes here, so it might not be entirely correct. IOhannes did the work to split puredata into many packages, including puredata-dev. For a transition plan, the new puredata was supposed to depend on puredata-dev, so that the old Build- Depends would work. That didn't happen, so now all of the existing packages don't build, since the headers are no longer installed when you install puredata. The bugs were then files against the packages that no longer build. I've fixed all of my packages to work with "Build-Depends: puredata- dev | puredata (<< 0.43)" http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629700 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629702 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629705 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629706 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629708 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629710 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629711 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629791 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629718 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629796 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629799 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629802 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=629779 .hc The arc of history bends towards justice. - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
vlc 1.1.10-1 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the vlc source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 1.1.9-1 Current version: 1.1.10-1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ 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: please upload: puredata-import
On Jun 13, 2011, at 8:24 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 15:06, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:40 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 22:05, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 19:18 +, Felipe Sateler wrote: I'm confused. You make a change for puredata >= 0.43. Does this break puredata <0.43? The Depends field suggests that (puredata-core is non existent until 0.43). If so, the build-depends on puredata << 0.43 is wrong. puredata << 0.43 provides everything, headers, app, gui, doc, etc. With 0.43, the headers are in puredata-dev and puredata is a meta package that installs everything. I wanted to avoid having the package Build-Depend on the whole suite of packages, that's why I added the 0.43. Plus in the future, puredata might no longer also install puredata-dev. Also, doesn't 0.43 bring in the required headers? I think the add_required_headers patch can be removed. Yes, the puredata-dev 0.43 package does provide those headers, but I wanted to leave in the patch for now to aid backporting and let the dust settle on the big changes that happened with the puredata package being split into puredata-gui, puredata-dev, puredata-core, etc. The package won't work unmodified anyways, since it Depends on puredata-core, which doesn't exist until 0.43. So strictly speaking the aid for backporting is incomplete (also, it installs into a different dir, so that would need to be changed too). I suggest just dropping the << 0.43 option, since it misleads into thinking it could actually work unchanged with 0.42. Please update the changelog. I have reviewed this and will upload tomorrow afternoon (GMT-4, so probably past midnight in europe). Ok, makes sense, I removed the << 0.43 and pushed. Offering puredata as an option is wrong too (it still allows 0.42) Yes, good point. I also now realized that a backport would also mean changing the installed folder, since the puredata 0.43 package suite installs into /usr/lib/puredata now, while puredata 0.42 installed into /usr/lib/pd .hc "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from scarcity."-John Gilmore ___ 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: please upload: puredata-import
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:30 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > On Jun 13, 2011, at 8:24 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 15:06, Hans-Christoph Steiner > > wrote: > >> > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:40 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> > >>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 22:05, Hans-Christoph Steiner > >>> > >>> wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 19:18 +, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > > > I'm confused. You make a change for puredata >= 0.43. Does this > > break > > puredata <0.43? The Depends field suggests that (puredata-core > > is non > > existent until 0.43). If so, the build-depends on puredata << > > 0.43 is > > wrong. > > puredata << 0.43 provides everything, headers, app, gui, doc, > etc. With > 0.43, the headers are in puredata-dev and puredata is a meta > package > that installs everything. I wanted to avoid having the package > Build-Depend on the whole suite of packages, that's why I added the > 0.43. Plus in the future, puredata might no longer also install > puredata-dev. > > > Also, doesn't 0.43 bring in the required headers? I think the > > add_required_headers patch can be removed. > > Yes, the puredata-dev 0.43 package does provide those headers, > but I > wanted to leave in the patch for now to aid backporting and let > the dust > settle on the big changes that happened with the puredata package > being > split into puredata-gui, puredata-dev, puredata-core, etc. > >>> > >>> The package won't work unmodified anyways, since it Depends on > >>> puredata-core, which doesn't exist until 0.43. So strictly speaking > >>> the aid for backporting is incomplete (also, it installs into a > >>> different dir, so that would need to be changed too). > >>> > >>> I suggest just dropping the << 0.43 option, since it misleads into > >>> thinking it could actually work unchanged with 0.42. > >>> > >>> > >>> Please update the changelog. I have reviewed this and will upload > >>> tomorrow afternoon (GMT-4, so probably past midnight in europe). > >> > >> > >> Ok, makes sense, I removed the << 0.43 and pushed. > > > > Offering puredata as an option is wrong too (it still allows 0.42) > > > Yes, good point. I also now realized that a backport would also mean > changing the installed folder, since the puredata 0.43 package suite > installs into /usr/lib/puredata now, while puredata 0.42 installed > into /usr/lib/pd I should add: I pushed the changes. .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Accepted: jalv_0~svn3395-1.debian.tar.gz to main/j/jalv/jalv_0~svn3395-1.debian.tar.gz jalv_0~svn3395-1.dsc to main/j/jalv/jalv_0~svn3395-1.dsc jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.deb to main/j/jalv/jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.deb jalv_0~svn3395.orig.tar.bz2 to main/j/jalv/jalv_0~svn3395.orig.tar.bz2 Override entries for your package: jalv_0~svn3395-1.dsc - optional sound jalv_0~svn3395-1_amd64.deb - optional sound Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 630391 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#575600: marked as done (ffmpeg: Please add ffmpeg-mt for multithreading support)
Your message dated Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:51:06 + with message-id and subject line Bug#575600: fixed in libav 4:0.7~rc1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #575600, regarding ffmpeg: Please add ffmpeg-mt for multithreading support to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 575600: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575600 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Subject: Please add ffmpeg-mt for multithreading support Package: ffmpeg Version: 4:0.5.1-3 Severity: wishlist ffmpeg-mt enabled mutithreaded decoding for ffmpeg. This is necesary for watch e.g. h264 movies with huge bitrates (+1kbit/s). ffmpeg-mt is currently located here: http://gitorious.org/ffmpeg/ffmpeg-mt Description on http://gitorious.org/ffmpeg/ffmpeg-mt: Experimental multithreaded decoding branch of FFmpeg, based on a project for Google SoC 2008. See mt-work/todo.txt for remaining tasks. Please consider adding it to the official repositories. -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (989, 'testing'), (987, 'unstable'), (986, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-4-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages ffmpeg depends on: ii libavcodec52 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg codec library ii libavdevice52 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg device handling library ii libavfilter0 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg video filtering library ii libavformat52 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg file format library ii libavutil49 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg utility library ii libc6 2.10.2-6 Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libpostproc51 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg video postprocessing librar ii libsdl1.2debian 1.2.13-5 Simple DirectMedia Layer ii libswscale0 4:0.5.1-3 ffmpeg video scaling library ffmpeg recommends no packages. ffmpeg suggests no packages. -- no debconf information --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Source: libav Source-Version: 4:0.7~rc1-1 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of libav, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: ffmpeg-dbg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/ffmpeg-dbg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb ffmpeg-doc_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb to main/liba/libav/ffmpeg-doc_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb ffmpeg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/ffmpeg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libav-dbg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libav-dbg_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libav-doc_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb to main/liba/libav/libav-doc_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb libav-source_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb to main/liba/libav/libav-source_0.7~rc1-1_all.deb libav_0.7~rc1-1.debian.tar.gz to main/liba/libav/libav_0.7~rc1-1.debian.tar.gz libav_0.7~rc1-1.dsc to main/liba/libav/libav_0.7~rc1-1.dsc libav_0.7~rc1.orig.tar.gz to main/liba/libav/libav_0.7~rc1.orig.tar.gz libavcodec-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavcodec-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavcodec53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavcodec53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavdevice-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavdevice-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavdevice53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavdevice53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavfilter-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavfilter-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavfilter2_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavfilter2_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavformat-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavformat-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavformat53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavformat53_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavutil-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavutil-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libavutil51_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libavutil51_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libpostproc-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libpostproc-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libpostproc52_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libpostproc52_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libswscale-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libswscale-dev_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb libswscale1_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb to main/liba/libav/libswscale1_0.7~rc1-1_amd64.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 575...@bugs.debian.org, and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance sof
where is irc
where is the pkg-multimedia irc channel? ___ 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: where is irc
Am Dienstag, den 14.06.2011, 18:29 -0500 schrieb kev: > where is the pkg-multimedia irc channel? We have #debian-multimedia on OFTC. -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ 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#630557: Please use DejaVu instead of Bitstream Vera font
Package: libprojectm2 Version: 2.0.1+dfsg-9 Severity: wishlist DejaVu is a superset of Bitstream Vera and is usually installed by default. The following configuration in config.inp seems to work: Title Font = /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf Menu Font = /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf -- Jindrich Makovicka ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
