On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > [Keeping only debian-multimedia and [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the > recipients' list, as I suspect it's not that interesting for the other > original recipients] > > >>>>> "ju" == Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Do we have a plan how to handle this with future JACK packages > >> ? > >> > >> I think that it would be better to include the strict > >> dependency rules in the packages instead of forcing them by the > >> naming scheme of the JACK libraries. Several of the packages > >> that rely on JACK only use a subset of its API, and therefore > >> work across several releases. Others don't (e.g. those > >> including the transport API), they have to depend on specific > >> libjack versions. > > > ju> I've got an impression that by the time we actually get this > ju> release in, we are probably going to be looking at 0.90, which > ju> should be more stable, and then we'll probably be looking at > ju> 1.0, which should be two more ABI changes; which isn't too > ju> bad. > > For the record, at: > > http://apt.agnula.org/pool/main/j/jack-audio-connection-kit/ > > you can find an unofficial package of Jack 0.90.1. The sources.list > lines are: > Most probably we'll stick to Jack 0.90.1 for the DeMuDi 1.1 forthcoming release. All packages that depend on jack will be rebuilt against the 0.90.1 library.
Best regards, Free Ekanayaka
