Le dimanche 20 juillet 2008 à 16:05 -0500, Jason D. Clinton a écrit :
> Loïc, you offered to NMU this package here:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=422590
>
> This vastly improves the Gnome sound situation. Hope we can
> get this in for L
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Jason D. Clinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> > That's interesting indeed! So you avoid that by using an OSS driver
>> > instead of the ALSA one
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > That's interesting indeed! So you avoid that by using an OSS driver
> > instead of the ALSA one? I can really not imagine how esound on top of
> > a broken ALSA driver would sound
Christian Perrier writes ("Re: Non-related 'Recommends' dependencies - bug or
not?"):
> So, well, in such case, closing with "I think this is not a bug
> because synaptic is recommended by another package in the dependency
> chain" would have been
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:44:23 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Last time I checked, libesd-alsa0 was still completely unusable (well,
> except for some weird kind of sound-based torture).
I regularly help users to find out why their sound has stopped working,
and the cause is usually due to libes
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:12:52AM +0100, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
Am Mo den 16. Jun 2008 um 6:25 schrieb Martin Pitt:
very poor code quality
That might be. But that's a problem of many gnome applications.
To be quite honest, I've seen the code for esd, and it is terrible.
In fact, worse than al
Le mardi 17 juin 2008 à 14:06 +0100, Klaus Ethgen a écrit :
> OSS: Works well.
> OSS<-ESD: Works well too.
> ALSA: The problems above.
> ALSA<-ESD: I never really tested.
Last time I checked, libesd-alsa0 was still completely unusable (well,
except for some weird kind of sound-based torture).
--
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008, Martin Pitt wrote:
> That's interesting indeed! So you avoid that by using an OSS driver
> instead of the ALSA one? I can really not imagine how esound on top of
> a broken ALSA driver would sound better than just using the ALSA
> output directly?
It might normalize which sa
Klaus Ethgen [2008-06-17 14:06 +0100]:
> > The alternative to esound is not really ALSA, but rather pulseaudio.
>
> Is pulsaudio supported by applications like wine for example? Do
> pulsaudio work on top of OSS?
pulseaudio provides an esound ABI compatibility layer, thus it's a
drop-in replaceme
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Martin,
Am Di den 17. Jun 2008 um 11:50 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> Klaus Ethgen [2008-06-17 10:12 +0100]:
> > I cannot prove that. Its sound quality is much better than the one of
> > ALSA direct. (Well esd on top of OSS. It is not that good than wit
Hi Klaus,
Klaus Ethgen [2008-06-17 10:12 +0100]:
> I cannot prove that. Its sound quality is much better than the one of
> ALSA direct. (Well esd on top of OSS. It is not that good than with OSS
> direct but it is ok.)
Hm, that rather sounds like for your card the OSS driver is much
better than t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Am Mo den 16. Jun 2008 um 6:25 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> esound should *so much* die completely. It has very poor sound quality
I cannot prove that. Its sound quality is much better than the one of
ALSA direct. (Well esd on top of OSS. It is not th
Frans Pop [2008-06-15 20:39 +0200]:
> Also, the package has had uploads of new upstream versions to Ubuntu
> without getting similar uploads in Debian, but even there not by its
> Debian maintainer who AFAIK is an Canonical employee.
esound should *so much* die completely. It has very poor soun
(d-qa CCed because of the status of esound; please CC me on replies)
On Friday 13 June 2008, you wrote:
> There are plenty of other examples. Here's a few of my favorites (look
> up what packages depend on these libs yourself):
> - libadns1 -> libadns1-bin (test tools/utils)
> - libdjvulibre21 ->
Le vendredi 13 juin 2008 à 16:03 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq a écrit :
> > I think at most synaptic deserves a suggests in that case.
>
> I am absolutely not sure of myself, but I think this is due to the new
> "missing plugins installation procedure" that launches synaptic to
> install new pack
Lennart Sorensen a écrit :
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:15:59AM +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>> Thanks, you hinted me to discover it:
>>
>> $ aptitude why banshee synaptic
>> p banshee Recommends brasero
>> p brasero Recommends gnome-mount
>> p gnome-mount Dependslibeel2-2
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:15:59AM +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> Thanks, you hinted me to discover it:
>
> $ aptitude why banshee synaptic
> p banshee Recommends brasero
> p brasero Recommends gnome-mount
> p gnome-mount Dependslibeel2-2.20
> p libeel2-2.20 Recommends
Le vendredi 13 juin 2008 à 07:18 +0200, Christian Perrier a écrit :
> Yes, that takes time, but it's certainly worth it. As package
> maintainers, our source of information are users and we really should
> appear as slapping the nice people who care to report bugs...
>
+1
This would stand in pa
Quoting Steve Greenland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On 12-Jun-08, 13:57 (CDT), "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bug was closed by maintainer with note "it is not a bug". Is he right?
>
> Banshee's maintainer isn't (and can't) be responsible for other packages
> recommends.
Not bl
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:31:22AM -0400, Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Frans Pop wrote:
>
> > Dependencies should in principle be "top down", not "bottom up". And
> > defining dependencies from libs to apps is almost per definition "bottom
> > up".
>
> As a nice experim
Frans Pop wrote:
> Dependencies should in principle be "top down", not "bottom up". And
> defining dependencies from libs to apps is almost per definition "bottom
> up".
As a nice experiment (you need testing or unstable's aptitude for this):
% aptitude search '?section(^libs) ?recommends(!?sect
Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 is only suggests gnome-app-install.
> I've found the actual chain:
>
> p libeel2-2.20 Recommends synaptic
To me this definitely looks wrong.
In general libs should be extremely careful about using Recommends for
applications, especi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 12-Jun-08, 13:57 (CDT), "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Bug was closed by maintainer with note "it is not a bug". Is he right?
>
> Banshee's maintainer isn't (and can't) be responsible for other package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 09:57:13PM +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>> Recently I've noticed that 'Recommends' chain for package 'banshee' leads to
>> packages,
>> non-related with media-playing at all, for example, 'synapti
On 12-Jun-08, 13:57 (CDT), "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bug was closed by maintainer with note "it is not a bug". Is he right?
Banshee's maintainer isn't (and can't) be responsible for other packages
recommends.
It looks like the bug is in libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-0 wh
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 09:57:13PM +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> Recently I've noticed that 'Recommends' chain for package 'banshee' leads to
> packages,
> non-related with media-playing at all, for example, 'synaptic'. Then I filed
> the minor bug
> [1].
>
> Bug was closed by maintainer w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello all.
Recently I've noticed that 'Recommends' chain for package 'banshee' leads to
packages,
non-related with media-playing at all, for example, 'synaptic'. Then I filed
the minor bug
[1].
Bug was closed by maintainer with note "it is not a bu
27 matches
Mail list logo
