Hi Julian, please don't drop the list from CC, we are discussing a team-maintained package.
Am Sonntag, den 09.11.2014, 03:59 -0800 schrieb Julian Cable: > I've just asked myself the same question - I had a go at making the > changes and it all worked fine. If we add the new libraries to the > existing packages, there is really only a change to the Makefile.am > and it's all done! I see. I would have prefered the "long" way of running "./configure --with-drm", then "make", then rename and backup the library, "make clean" and repeat without "--with-drm". But checking configure.in, I see that the only difference between a build "--with-drm" and a build without is actually the two #defines that you add, so I think your way is even the cleaner solution. > I've raised tickets on the upstream projects for this but I don't know > if Menno Bakker can make time to do a new release. It could be done as > a Debian patch and i've made the patch files (you would need to review > and modify the metadata in these). I am afraid that upstream is pretty dead now. The latest releases are more than 5 years old, Menno is working on something different professionally, I believe, and the latest changes I proposed on the sourceforge bug tracker weren't even merged by himself anymore, but by someone else (and this is even more than two years ago). > In my experiments I added new binary packages, but I think this is a > bad idea. Why do you think so? I think this should be discussed with the team. - Fabian _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
