Re: motion, 2.6, and v4l loopback device [WAS Re: motion - please do a sponsored upload for me (new revision with debconf fix)]
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 01:48:26AM +0200, Frederik Dannemare wrote: > > BTW, what is the deal with motion and 2.6 kernels ? I am under the > > understanding that it requires the videoloop or whatever module, > > which is not only abandoned upstream, but also not yet ported to 2.6 > > kernels. > > I have been using motion and 2.6 without the v4l loopback device. I Ok. > don't know much about it, but I think it was initially developed for > debugging motion in real-time or something like that. I have been helping someone, who has a customer who is using linux with a set of surveillance cameras. I think they use the vloopback device to have more than one app access the video device, namely motion and then vlc for video streaming server. Friendly, Sven Luther
RFS: gtklp-0.9u
Hi guys, gonna make this quick, as I'm in a public Knoppix box: I've just finished a very *late* deb of gtklp-0.9u. Nothing really worth noting, except that it might get into Sarge (but, in all probability, it won't :() Here's the signed-changes file: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:59:13 +0800 Source: gtklp Binary: gtklp Architecture: source i386 Version: 0.9u-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Zak B. Elep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Changed-By: Zak B. Elep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: gtklp - Frontend for CUPS written in GTK2 Changes: gtklp (0.9u-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release Files: 87eaa908c502523d0831670e72c6b8a1 626 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1.dsc 409a78b6e69ebbb1667a0becdddf74c3 1018305 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u.orig.tar.gz 04e7eb572a88fced7701b5dcae9582a5 4294 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1.diff.gz dc165cf0dd985cb5af080dbd9da51639 144648 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBKpb1V4ex/fpThR0RAiuyAJ4hJ+MVAouKc/PYRS2A8RqSicMeTgCeNWR0 YAytlmw+8+W4babMFw7fbdk= =73Bl -END PGP SIGNATURE- Again, I'm posting this so you guys may know and sponsor (re: ametzler ;) I appreciate any flak, though... Thanks In Advance, Zakame -- |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system
[zakame@spunge.org: Re: RFS: gtklp-0.9u]
-- |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system --- Begin Message --- On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:58:30AM -0500, Zak B. Elep wrote: > Hi guys, gonna make this quick, as I'm in a public Knoppix box: > > I've just finished a very *late* deb of gtklp-0.9u. Nothing really worth > noting, except that it might get into Sarge (but, in all probability, it won't > :() > Oops! I forgot the link: http://zakame.spunge.org/pub/debian/gtklp Cheers, Zakame |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system --- End Message ---
simonson Order directly from our FDA-approved manufacturers
From now on save up to 82% off Save on all your RX Medication order directly from our FDA-approved manufacturers Over 60 products, Save up to 82% on your RX drugs Type in rx-factory.com into your web browser No more notifications rx-factory.com/u Nancy Simmons
version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
Hi, when we last had a freeze, I wasn't a DD yet, therefore this was new for me: Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go into > testing. The official way is to upload also a package to testing. To upload > a package to testing (or: testing-proposed-updates, this are just > synonyms; tpu in short), it is necessary that the version number of the > upload is smaller than the current installed package in unstable, and > larger than the current installed package in testing. So, normally, you > have to upload a package (directly or in whichever delayed you consider > appropriate), and the version for testing in one more day delayed. Will this also be valid for non-base/standard packages, once everything is frozen? What version numbers are usually used? If it's no a NMU, does one upload an artificially high version number (debian revision of -50 or so) to unstable, just to be sure not to run out of maintainer-upload version numbers for testing-proposed-updates? Or is it normal to use NMU version numbers even for maintainer uploads to testing-proposed-updates? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:28:29PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go into > > testing. The official way is to upload also a package to testing. To upload > > a package to testing (or: testing-proposed-updates, this are just > > synonyms; tpu in short), it is necessary that the version number of the > > upload is smaller than the current installed package in unstable, and > > larger than the current installed package in testing. So, normally, you > > have to upload a package (directly or in whichever delayed you consider > > appropriate), and the version for testing in one more day delayed. > > Will this also be valid for non-base/standard packages, once everything > is frozen? Yes, unless the sid version already moved on. Versions in testing cannot be higher than those of unstable, so this must be this way. > What version numbers are usually used? If it's no a NMU, does one upload > an artificially high version number (debian revision of -50 or so) to > unstable, just to be sure not to run out of maintainer-upload version > numbers for testing-proposed-updates? Or is it normal to use NMU version > numbers even for maintainer uploads to testing-proposed-updates? You never run out of maintainer version numbers, since can you always add parts. Suppose you're currentlat at -3, then you can of course still upload -4, -5 etc to sid, which is the common way. If you want a sarge backport of fixes to sid, use -3sarge1. If it's a Non-Maintainer backport, use -3.sarge1. With this method, one dot in maintainer revision means NMU (with the before-dot part being the latest MU), zero dots means MU, a property nice to have. Unfortunately, -3sarge1 sorts before -3.1, so if you want as maintainer to backport a NMU to sarge, you're out of luck for straightforward solutions. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:28:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > > > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go > > into testing. The official way is to upload also a package to > > testing. To upload a package to testing (or: > > testing-proposed-updates, this are just synonyms; tpu in short), > > it is necessary that the version number of the upload is smaller > > than the current installed package in unstable, and larger than > > the current installed package in testing. [...] > What version numbers are usually used? Common practise seems to be keep using normale versioning for sid and 1.2.3-4.sarge.1 for tpu. cu andreas
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [clear explanation] thanks very much. > Unfortunately, -3sarge1 sorts before -3.1, so if you want as maintainer > to backport a NMU to sarge, you're out of luck for straightforward > solutions. I'll see that there won't be NMU's to be backported... By the way, why are only alphanumerics, . and + allowed in version numbers? If this were less resctrictive, one could do dpkg --compare-versions 1-3_sarge.1 gt 1-3.1; echo $? 0 Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Re: readline library question
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 03:34:57PM -0400, Alexander Baranov wrote:
>
> So, the readline seems to work fine with standard input-output, but somehow
> goes wrong when I try to use non-standard stream ("dirstream", associated
> with a socket in my case)
>
> Can anybody give an advise?
> Thanks in advance, Alex.
readline uses ncurses which in turns uses terminfo, you need to associate a
term type to your socket.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
ITA: mpg321
Hi, this night I made some small bugfixes to the mpg321 code and send it to Joe Drew, the upstream author and Debian maintainer of mpg321. Looking at the BTS and the changelogs I came to the thought, that development on the mpg321 code and package has been dead (except the 2 NMUs of course) for about a year. Today I sent mail to Joe Drew to ask if I'm correct and if I could adopt the authorship (and maintainership) of mpg321. I didn't wait for a reply and made a package (basically for me) which is a merge of 0.2.10.3 (NMU with security fixes) and 0.3.0 (the latest CVS) including some small fixes ;) Please have a look at: http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe Drew himself :) I hope I don't look like a hijacker and I hope I'm not that monkey with a tin tool because I didn't wait for a reply :) well... regards, Stephan Beyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 17:35, Stephan Beyer wrote: > I hope I don't look like a hijacker and I hope I'm not that monkey > with a tin tool because I didn't wait for a reply :) > You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. -- Chris Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 72021847 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20B2 CB34 8AA5 05BC A90C 2CDD 2768 D4B4 2B93 424B signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: ITA: mpg321
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 11:35:12PM +0200, Stephan Beyer wrote: > Hi, > > this night I made some small bugfixes to the mpg321 code and send it > to Joe Drew, the upstream author and Debian maintainer of mpg321. > Looking at the BTS and the changelogs I came to the thought, that > development on the mpg321 code and package has been dead (except > the 2 NMUs of course) for about a year. Yes, I corresponded with him about a month ago. When I asked if he considered his package to be actively maintained, he said "not really". > Today I sent mail to Joe Drew to ask if I'm correct and if I could adopt > the authorship (and maintainership) of mpg321. I didn't wait for a reply > and made a package (basically for me) which is a merge of 0.2.10.3 (NMU > with security fixes) and 0.3.0 (the latest CVS) including some small > fixes ;) > Please have a look at: > http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 Is that the sf.net CVS? > Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe > Drew himself :) I hope so too! I have a patch in BTS to fix crashes with invalid input; I'll let you know if your version passes my test:) Thanks, Justin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Chris Anderson wrote: You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. I will sponsor in Stephan's NMUs and patches to mpg321, but am currently unwilling to give up maintainership of it. I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude and is certainly overeager. It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who could get angry over it. -- Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If you use Internet Explorer, your computer isn't safe. http://getfirefox.com/ and leave pop-up ads, spyware and viruses behind.
Re: ITA: mpg321
Hi, Chris Anderson wrote: > You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then > generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day > isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has > access to email 24x7. It *is* rude :) It's just... in my overzealousness I thought that Joe would definitely give me a O.k. ;) Strange optimism (or pessimism, because it seems that it's still a lot of work to let mpg321 be a really good, free replacement to mpg123... nevertheless Joe Drew did a *great* job) I uploaded the package to the server so that I can use such a mpg321 version (with some really small fixes of bugs that really annoyed me) on every machine. Then I thought, once uploaded, I could also make it public. Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I will sponsor in Stephan's NMUs and patches to mpg321, but am currently > unwilling to give up maintainership of it. You'll me, because I re-indented the code which can be found in the .tar.gz. :) (I thought that was useful because there was a scary indentation-style mix...) > I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude > and is certainly overeager. Yes, it is :) > It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who > could get angry over it. I think *I* would get angry, especially if it is a project which caused that much time. But my personized overeager also told me to make a fork (which doesn't use libmad0, because it seems a bit mad), but that's more rude than asking for adoption ;) regards, sbeyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Hi, > > Please have a look at: > > http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 > Is that the sf.net CVS? yes. Oh, are there other CVS? Any with more recent changes? > > Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe > > Drew himself :) > I hope so too! I have a patch in BTS to fix crashes with invalid > input; I'll let you know if your version passes my test:) If nobody included the patch (I didn't), it won't pass the tests, I guess :) sbeyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Joe Drew wrote: Chris Anderson wrote: You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude and is certainly overeager. It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who could get angry over it. If I were on vacation for 2 weeks, I would be royally peeved. Richard
Re: motion, 2.6, and v4l loopback device [WAS Re: motion - please do a sponsored upload for me (new revision with debconf fix)]
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 01:48:26AM +0200, Frederik Dannemare wrote: > > BTW, what is the deal with motion and 2.6 kernels ? I am under the > > understanding that it requires the videoloop or whatever module, > > which is not only abandoned upstream, but also not yet ported to 2.6 > > kernels. > > I have been using motion and 2.6 without the v4l loopback device. I Ok. > don't know much about it, but I think it was initially developed for > debugging motion in real-time or something like that. I have been helping someone, who has a customer who is using linux with a set of surveillance cameras. I think they use the vloopback device to have more than one app access the video device, namely motion and then vlc for video streaming server. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: gtklp-0.9u
Hi guys, gonna make this quick, as I'm in a public Knoppix box: I've just finished a very *late* deb of gtklp-0.9u. Nothing really worth noting, except that it might get into Sarge (but, in all probability, it won't :() Here's the signed-changes file: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:59:13 +0800 Source: gtklp Binary: gtklp Architecture: source i386 Version: 0.9u-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Zak B. Elep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Changed-By: Zak B. Elep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: gtklp - Frontend for CUPS written in GTK2 Changes: gtklp (0.9u-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release Files: 87eaa908c502523d0831670e72c6b8a1 626 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1.dsc 409a78b6e69ebbb1667a0becdddf74c3 1018305 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u.orig.tar.gz 04e7eb572a88fced7701b5dcae9582a5 4294 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1.diff.gz dc165cf0dd985cb5af080dbd9da51639 144648 x11 optional gtklp_0.9u-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBKpb1V4ex/fpThR0RAiuyAJ4hJ+MVAouKc/PYRS2A8RqSicMeTgCeNWR0 YAytlmw+8+W4babMFw7fbdk= =73Bl -END PGP SIGNATURE- Again, I'm posting this so you guys may know and sponsor (re: ametzler ;) I appreciate any flak, though... Thanks In Advance, Zakame -- |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[zakame@spunge.org: Re: RFS: gtklp-0.9u]
-- |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system --- Begin Message --- On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:58:30AM -0500, Zak B. Elep wrote: > Hi guys, gonna make this quick, as I'm in a public Knoppix box: > > I've just finished a very *late* deb of gtklp-0.9u. Nothing really worth > noting, except that it might get into Sarge (but, in all probability, it won't > :() > Oops! I forgot the link: http://zakame.spunge.org/pub/debian/gtklp Cheers, Zakame |=-ZAK B. ELEP (Registered Linux User #327585)-=| || Web: http://zakame.spunge.org GPG ID: 0xFA53851D || || http://zakame.homelinux.orgICQ UIN: 33236644 || || Location: Daet, Camarines Norte Running Linux 2.6 || |=--1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D--=| Debian - When you've got better things to do than to fix a borken system --- End Message ---
simonson Order directly from our FDA-approved manufacturers
From now on save up to 82% off Save on all your RX Medication order directly from our FDA-approved manufacturers Over 60 products, Save up to 82% on your RX drugs Type in rx-factory.com into your web browser No more notifications rx-factory.com/u Nancy Simmons -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
Hi, when we last had a freeze, I wasn't a DD yet, therefore this was new for me: Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go into > testing. The official way is to upload also a package to testing. To upload > a package to testing (or: testing-proposed-updates, this are just > synonyms; tpu in short), it is necessary that the version number of the > upload is smaller than the current installed package in unstable, and > larger than the current installed package in testing. So, normally, you > have to upload a package (directly or in whichever delayed you consider > appropriate), and the version for testing in one more day delayed. Will this also be valid for non-base/standard packages, once everything is frozen? What version numbers are usually used? If it's no a NMU, does one upload an artificially high version number (debian revision of -50 or so) to unstable, just to be sure not to run out of maintainer-upload version numbers for testing-proposed-updates? Or is it normal to use NMU version numbers even for maintainer uploads to testing-proposed-updates? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:28:29PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go into > > testing. The official way is to upload also a package to testing. To upload > > a package to testing (or: testing-proposed-updates, this are just > > synonyms; tpu in short), it is necessary that the version number of the > > upload is smaller than the current installed package in unstable, and > > larger than the current installed package in testing. So, normally, you > > have to upload a package (directly or in whichever delayed you consider > > appropriate), and the version for testing in one more day delayed. > > Will this also be valid for non-base/standard packages, once everything > is frozen? Yes, unless the sid version already moved on. Versions in testing cannot be higher than those of unstable, so this must be this way. > What version numbers are usually used? If it's no a NMU, does one upload > an artificially high version number (debian revision of -50 or so) to > unstable, just to be sure not to run out of maintainer-upload version > numbers for testing-proposed-updates? Or is it normal to use NMU version > numbers even for maintainer uploads to testing-proposed-updates? You never run out of maintainer version numbers, since can you always add parts. Suppose you're currentlat at -3, then you can of course still upload -4, -5 etc to sid, which is the common way. If you want a sarge backport of fixes to sid, use -3sarge1. If it's a Non-Maintainer backport, use -3.sarge1. With this method, one dot in maintainer revision means NMU (with the before-dot part being the latest MU), zero dots means MU, a property nice to have. Unfortunately, -3sarge1 sorts before -3.1, so if you want as maintainer to backport a NMU to sarge, you're out of luck for straightforward solutions. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates (was: current specialities for NMUs)
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:28:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in debian-devel: > > > These packages are frozen, i.e. newer uploads to unstable won't go > > into testing. The official way is to upload also a package to > > testing. To upload a package to testing (or: > > testing-proposed-updates, this are just synonyms; tpu in short), > > it is necessary that the version number of the upload is smaller > > than the current installed package in unstable, and larger than > > the current installed package in testing. [...] > What version numbers are usually used? Common practise seems to be keep using normale versioning for sid and 1.2.3-4.sarge.1 for tpu. cu andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: version numbers in testing-proposed-updates
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [clear explanation] thanks very much. > Unfortunately, -3sarge1 sorts before -3.1, so if you want as maintainer > to backport a NMU to sarge, you're out of luck for straightforward > solutions. I'll see that there won't be NMU's to be backported... By the way, why are only alphanumerics, . and + allowed in version numbers? If this were less resctrictive, one could do dpkg --compare-versions 1-3_sarge.1 gt 1-3.1; echo $? 0 Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Re: readline library question
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 03:34:57PM -0400, Alexander Baranov wrote:
>
> So, the readline seems to work fine with standard input-output, but somehow
> goes wrong when I try to use non-standard stream ("dirstream", associated
> with a socket in my case)
>
> Can anybody give an advise?
> Thanks in advance, Alex.
readline uses ncurses which in turns uses terminfo, you need to associate a
term type to your socket.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ITA: mpg321
Hi, this night I made some small bugfixes to the mpg321 code and send it to Joe Drew, the upstream author and Debian maintainer of mpg321. Looking at the BTS and the changelogs I came to the thought, that development on the mpg321 code and package has been dead (except the 2 NMUs of course) for about a year. Today I sent mail to Joe Drew to ask if I'm correct and if I could adopt the authorship (and maintainership) of mpg321. I didn't wait for a reply and made a package (basically for me) which is a merge of 0.2.10.3 (NMU with security fixes) and 0.3.0 (the latest CVS) including some small fixes ;) Please have a look at: http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe Drew himself :) I hope I don't look like a hijacker and I hope I'm not that monkey with a tin tool because I didn't wait for a reply :) well... regards, Stephan Beyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 17:35, Stephan Beyer wrote: > I hope I don't look like a hijacker and I hope I'm not that monkey > with a tin tool because I didn't wait for a reply :) > You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. -- Chris Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 72021847 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20B2 CB34 8AA5 05BC A90C 2CDD 2768 D4B4 2B93 424B signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: ITA: mpg321
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 11:35:12PM +0200, Stephan Beyer wrote: > Hi, > > this night I made some small bugfixes to the mpg321 code and send it > to Joe Drew, the upstream author and Debian maintainer of mpg321. > Looking at the BTS and the changelogs I came to the thought, that > development on the mpg321 code and package has been dead (except > the 2 NMUs of course) for about a year. Yes, I corresponded with him about a month ago. When I asked if he considered his package to be actively maintained, he said "not really". > Today I sent mail to Joe Drew to ask if I'm correct and if I could adopt > the authorship (and maintainership) of mpg321. I didn't wait for a reply > and made a package (basically for me) which is a merge of 0.2.10.3 (NMU > with security fixes) and 0.3.0 (the latest CVS) including some small > fixes ;) > Please have a look at: > http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 Is that the sf.net CVS? > Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe > Drew himself :) I hope so too! I have a patch in BTS to fix crashes with invalid input; I'll let you know if your version passes my test:) Thanks, Justin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Chris Anderson wrote: You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. I will sponsor in Stephan's NMUs and patches to mpg321, but am currently unwilling to give up maintainership of it. I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude and is certainly overeager. It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who could get angry over it. -- Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If you use Internet Explorer, your computer isn't safe. http://getfirefox.com/ and leave pop-up ads, spyware and viruses behind. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITA: mpg321
Hi, Chris Anderson wrote: > You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then > generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day > isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has > access to email 24x7. It *is* rude :) It's just... in my overzealousness I thought that Joe would definitely give me a O.k. ;) Strange optimism (or pessimism, because it seems that it's still a lot of work to let mpg321 be a really good, free replacement to mpg123... nevertheless Joe Drew did a *great* job) I uploaded the package to the server so that I can use such a mpg321 version (with some really small fixes of bugs that really annoyed me) on every machine. Then I thought, once uploaded, I could also make it public. Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I will sponsor in Stephan's NMUs and patches to mpg321, but am currently > unwilling to give up maintainership of it. You'll me, because I re-indented the code which can be found in the .tar.gz. :) (I thought that was useful because there was a scary indentation-style mix...) > I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude > and is certainly overeager. Yes, it is :) > It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who > could get angry over it. I think *I* would get angry, especially if it is a project which caused that much time. But my personized overeager also told me to make a fork (which doesn't use libmad0, because it seems a bit mad), but that's more rude than asking for adoption ;) regards, sbeyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Hi, > > Please have a look at: > > http://noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/packages/?main,src,mpg321 > Is that the sf.net CVS? yes. Oh, are there other CVS? Any with more recent changes? > > Because I'm not a DD, I hope somebody will sponsor it... perhaps Joe > > Drew himself :) > I hope so too! I have a patch in BTS to fix crashes with invalid > input; I'll let you know if your version passes my test:) If nobody included the patch (I didn't), it won't pass the tests, I guess :) sbeyer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITA: mpg321
Joe Drew wrote: Chris Anderson wrote: You definitely need to wait for a reply for at least a week, then generally try one last time to contact him. Hijacking it after 1 day isn't responsible and is sometimes considered rude, not everyone has access to email 24x7. I do agree that not waiting for at least a week can be considered rude and is certainly overeager. It isn't a problem in this case, but I can conceive of a maintainer who could get angry over it. If I were on vacation for 2 weeks, I would be royally peeved. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
