On 18/11/16 19:45, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> 2016-10-26 13:12 GMT+02:00 Bálint Réczey :
>> Hi James,
>>
>> 2016-10-26 12:48 GMT+02:00 James Cowgill :
>>> On 26/10/16 11:00, Bálint Réczey wrote:
Hi Paul,
2016-09-21 4:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálin
2016-10-26 13:12 GMT+02:00 Bálint Réczey :
> Hi James,
>
> 2016-10-26 12:48 GMT+02:00 James Cowgill :
>> On 26/10/16 11:00, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>> 2016-09-21 4:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> I have changed kodi 17.
Hi James,
2016-10-26 12:48 GMT+02:00 James Cowgill :
> On 26/10/16 11:00, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> 2016-09-21 4:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
>>> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>>>
I have changed kodi 17.x to provide xbmc*.
The next upload to experimenta
On 26/10/16 11:00, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> 2016-09-21 4:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
>> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>>
>>> I have changed kodi 17.x to provide xbmc*.
>>> The next upload to experimental will contain the fix.
>>
>> Excellent, thanks for that!
>
>
2016-10-26 12:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> On Wed, 2016-10-26 at 12:19 +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>
>> I'd suggest to re-apply (and maybe even increment) xbmc's epoch for kodi.
>
> That isn't going to fix the RC bug.
>
> The only options are:
>
> * Generate the xbmc versions in a different way.
2016-10-26 12:19 GMT+02:00 Fabian Greffrath :
> Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> Are you suggesting some other solution? I'm not sure I understand it then.
>> Xbmc has epoch which I got rid of with kodi.
>
> I'd suggest to re-apply (and maybe even increment) xbmc's epoch for kodi.
> What's the point in ge
On Wed, 2016-10-26 at 12:19 +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> I'd suggest to re-apply (and maybe even increment) xbmc's epoch for kodi.
That isn't going to fix the RC bug.
The only options are:
* Generate the xbmc versions in a different way.
* Move the xbmc transitional packages back to xbmc
Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Are you suggesting some other solution? I'm not sure I understand it then.
> Xbmc has epoch which I got rid of with kodi.
I'd suggest to re-apply (and maybe even increment) xbmc's epoch for kodi.
What's the point in getting rid of an epoch, why is it even important?
- Fa
Hi Fabian,
2016-10-26 12:06 GMT+02:00 Fabian Greffrath :
> Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> If you have any good idea please share it, otherwise I'm revert to
>> provide the transitional packages from xbmc.
>
> Epochs have been invented for this exact use case.
Are you suggesting some other solution? I'm
On Wed, 2016-10-26 at 12:00 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> It seems it is too much hassle to maintain the xbmc packages
> generated from kodi source, see #842141.
Ugh, that is annoying.
> I could append the current version to the xbmc package versions,
> but that would just confuse users.
That i
Bálint Réczey wrote:
> If you have any good idea please share it, otherwise I'm revert to
> provide the transitional packages from xbmc.
Epochs have been invented for this exact use case.
- Fabian
___
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-mu
Hi Paul,
2016-09-21 4:28 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>
>> I have changed kodi 17.x to provide xbmc*.
>> The next upload to experimental will contain the fix.
>
> Excellent, thanks for that!
It seems it is too much hassle to maintain the xbmc pac
On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 18:14 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> I have changed kodi 17.x to provide xbmc*.
> The next upload to experimental will contain the fix.
Excellent, thanks for that!
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
Hi Paul,
2016-09-01 8:21 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> On Thu, 2016-09-01 at 08:17 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>
>> Because this way we can get rid of the epoch.
>
> You can have different version numbers between source and binary
> packages. So src:kodi 16.1+dfsg1-2 can build xbmc 2:13.2+dfsg1-6.
>
> Y
On Thu, 2016-09-01 at 08:17 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Because this way we can get rid of the epoch.
You can have different version numbers between source and binary
packages. So src:kodi 16.1+dfsg1-2 can build xbmc 2:13.2+dfsg1-6.
You may also want to drop the orig.tar.gz from xbmc too.
--
2016-09-01 8:12 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> On Thu, 2016-09-01 at 08:11 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>
>> Xbmc packages are empty now helping the migration to kodi. I think
>> they should be released with stretch.
>
> Why are the transitional packages in src:xbmc instead of src:kodi?
Because this way w
On Thu, 2016-09-01 at 08:11 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Xbmc packages are empty now helping the migration to kodi. I think
> they should be released with stretch.
Why are the transitional packages in src:xbmc instead of src:kodi?
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Hi Paul,
2016-09-01 4:43 GMT+02:00 Paul Wise :
> Hi,
>
> Now that kodi is in Debian, should xbmc get removed?
>
> If you agree, please file a removal bug report:
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals
>
> If I don't hear back in 2 weeks I will file one.
Xbmc packages are empty now helping
Hi,
Now that kodi is in Debian, should xbmc get removed?
If you agree, please file a removal bug report:
https://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals
If I don't hear back in 2 weeks I will file one.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
19 matches
Mail list logo
