Source: mplayer
Followup-For: Bug #726838
Hi all,
I've made some fixes to help package building.
libav-compat.diff: adds system libav compatibility
Unfortunately the mplayer code is not enough clean to build using
system include so there is a catch.
I've removed local ffmpeg from includes (in co
On 12/20/13 06:42, Adam Majer wrote:
Package: jack-rack
Version: 1.4.8~rc1-2
Severity: important
1. Set some filters in jack-rack
2. save
3. load
4. [segfault]
Attached is an example file that segfaults.
[39022.436412] jack-rack[9415]: segfault at 0 ip (null) sp
7fffa607eb38 err
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:07:52 +0100
Source: ardour3
Binary: ardour3
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 3.5.143~dfsg-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers
Changed-By: Adrian Knoth
ardour3_3.5.143~dfsg-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
ardour3_3.5.143~dfsg-1.dsc
ardour3_3.5.143~dfsg.orig.tar.gz
ardour3_3.5.143~dfsg-1.debian.tar.gz
ardour3_3.5.143~dfsg-1_amd64.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host fran
FYI: The status of the mjpegtools source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 1:2.0.0+debian-2
Current version: 1:2.1.0+debian-2.1
--
This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of
new packages into testing happens multiple times
FYI: The status of the ffms2 source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 2.17+r731-3
Current version: 2.19-2
--
This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of
new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receiv
FYI: The status of the liblivemedia source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 2013.04.30-1
Current version: 2013.10.25-1
--
This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of
new packages into testing happens multiple times a day y
Quoting Felipe Sateler (2013-12-23 15:11:17)
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> Felipe Sateler writes:
>>> I have just uploaded a version (0.26~repack-8) that purposely fails
>>> on sparc and sparc64, so that it doesn't build again.
>>
>> If a package should not be bui
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Source: liblo
> Version: 0.26~repack-8
>
> Felipe Sateler writes:
>> I have just uploaded a version (0.26~repack-8) that purposely fails on
>> sparc and sparc64, so that it doesn't build again.
>
> If a package should not be built on an a
Source: liblo
Version: 0.26~repack-8
Felipe Sateler writes:
> I have just uploaded a version (0.26~repack-8) that purposely fails on
> sparc and sparc64, so that it doesn't build again.
If a package should not be built on an architecture, then there is an
Architecture field to indicate this. Ple
Hi Jorge,
I was wondering why I was not seeing the ITP you was talking about. I
guess you should try to read some relevant documentation since we
explicitly point to the way how you are doing ITPs in our policy:
http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/docs/policy.html#itp
It is very advisable to
11 matches
Mail list logo
