Am 19.06.2012 17:57, schrieb Han Boetes:
That is exactly the difference between a working and a non-working
binary. You're on the right track.
Alright. Since I consider CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS quite harmless, could
you please leave them as they are and rebuild another time with only
CFLAGS
On 20-06-12 09:14, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
Am 19.06.2012 17:57, schrieb Han Boetes:
Alright. Since I consider CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS quite harmless, could you
please leave them as they are and rebuild another time with only CFLAGS
reset to an empty string?
Most certainly. With only the CFLAGS
Am 20.06.2012 10:09, schrieb Han Boetes:
Most certainly. With only the CFLAGS cleared the library still works,
just like you suspected.
So it seems to choke on the stack-protector...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
With CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat
-Werror=format-security
it fails and with CFLAGS=-g -O2 it works fine indeed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Am 20.06.2012 11:07, schrieb Han Boetes:
With CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat
-Werror=format-security
it fails and with CFLAGS=-g -O2 it works fine indeed.
1) Could you check if it works with the latest SVN snapshot of libmpc:
svn co
tags 665974 patch upstream
thanks
Am Mittwoch, den 20.06.2012, 16:47 +0200 schrieb Fabian Greffrath:
1) Could you check if it works with the latest SVN snapshot of libmpc:
svn co http://svn.musepack.net/libmpc
2) Could you provide an example sound file somewhere? I do not have
one myself.
Your patch seems to fix the issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_variable#Definition.2C_declaration_and_the_extern_keyword
# Han
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Am 13.06.2012 23:23, schrieb Han Boetes:
So if there is a difference between the two packages it should be in
this diff.
[...]
--- libmpc_0.1~r459-1/compat2010-05-31 16:25:23.0 +0200
+++ libmpc_0.1~r459-2/compat2012-02-14 23:27:59.0 +0100
@@ -1 +1 @@
-7
+9
This change
That is exactly the difference between a working and a non-working
binary. You're on the right track.
I've repeated the buildprocess twice so that the only diffence is the
proposed flag changes.
# Han
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
So if there is a difference between the two packages it should be in
this diff.
And when looking at it: the differences in libmpcdec6.install... Does it
really mean the installed binaries are the ones found in /usr/lib rather
than in the fake installation directory?
diff -upwr
reassign 665974 libmpcdec6 2:0.1~r459-2
thanks
* Thom thom1...@gmail.com [2012-03-28 09:08 +1100]:
Hi Elimar!
Could you please test like:
mocp -O PreferredDecoders+=mpc(ffmpeg) file_name.mpc
Works fine in this case for me.
It seems that you are right about buggy libmpcdec6.
I
Package: moc
Version: 1:2.5.0~alpha4+svn20120224-1
Severity: normal
$ file 'file_name.mpc'
file_name.mpc: Musepack audio, SV 7.0, quality 10
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 3.3.0-trunk-686-pae (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale:
* Thom thom1...@gmail.com [2012-03-28 00:44 +1100]:
Package: moc
Version: 1:2.5.0~alpha4+svn20120224-1
Severity: normal
$ file 'file_name.mpc'
file_name.mpc: Musepack audio, SV 7.0, quality 10
Hi Thom,
I can reproduce :(. Could you please test like:
mocp -O
Hi Elimar!
Could you please test like:
mocp -O PreferredDecoders+=mpc(ffmpeg) file_name.mpc
Works fine in this case for me.
It seems that you are right about buggy libmpcdec6.
I tried to use libmpcdec6_0.1~r459-1_i386 from 'squeeze'
and all my .mpc files play without errors.
Thanks for
14 matches
Mail list logo
