Re: Update for liblo package on Debian

ne interested in packaging 0.26? -- Robert Jordens. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-multimedia-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: liblo0-dev

Hi Ian, On Fre, 2008-11-14 at 03:01 -0800, Ian McIntosh wrote: > liblo is at 0.25 now and the deb is at 0.23. Can we update? I'd love to. But I'm generally a bit behind with my Debian packages. I suggest that debian-multimedia have an eye on this as well. If anyone has some time, please go ahead

Re: [FWD] Re: [Jackit-devel] parallel installs to die

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Jordens wrote: > The original versioning scheme was decided upon by Junichi and me mainly > due to lines 40-42 in the configure.ac file. The policy was stressed > many times on the jack mailing list. The real reason for keeping the version in th

Re: [FWD] Re: [Jackit-devel] parallel installs to die

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 15:36 +0100, Free Ekanayaka wrote: > I'm sorry but I have to bother you again with the versioning issue of > the jack package. > Here below is a copy of the reply I sent to Paul Davis on the Jack > mailing list. It seems that this issue is making life harder for > p

Re: Uploading jack-audio-connection-kit to fix #394021

On Fri, October 20, 2006 11:31 am, geiger said: > If it is ok with you, I will upload a new version of jack > which fixes the RC bug this weekend. I also added a patch > to make the freebob driver compilable, although it's compilation > is not enabled yet, we are still waiting for libfreebob. > CC

Re: how to replace jackd?

Hello! [Fri, 02 Jun 2006] Dragan Noveski wrote: > hi, > i am running debian-etch/demudi-testing and my machine should only > working good audio, thats the only reason i am having it. in these > ressort there is lot of developement in the moment, you now. > now developers of jackd offering new ve

Re: alsa and jack latency

On Tue, 17 May 2005 22:58:08 +0100, Paul Brossier wrote: > I sent this mail a few days ago to debian-powerpc but had no reply. Maybe > someone here will have an idea. > > bye, Paul > > - Forwarded message from Paul Brossier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - > > Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 21:56:40 +0100

Re: Low latency kernels

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:33:33 +0100, Rem wrote: >>Is there any kernel specially tuned for low latency operation available >>on sid or just planned? >> >>Even although this is only for checking if list is alive, any answer will >>be useful. :) There are suitable kernels (2.4 with low latency patche

Re: jackd & related software

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:46:05 +0100, Djamel Ouerdane wrote: > My question is : why when I compile things myself, e.g. jamin, and run > it as before, it complains about the jack server not running ? It is > obsviously running. Same with any other jack app that I compiled myself > (like hydrogen c

JACK 0.99

Hi! Any comments about trying to get JACK 0.99 (the one in experimental) into unstable/sarge? I looked through the diff and tested with a bunch of appplications and everything worked fine. Robert. -- Is your job running? You'd better go catch it! signature.asc Description: Digital si

Re: RFP: kernel-patch-voluntary-preempt -- lower kernel latency by voluntary preemption

Hello! Yay. That was fun. Please try and give feedback. I really can't maintain it but if someone else looks over it and adopts it, I'll sponsor. Robert. -- Whoa...I did a 'zcat /v

Re: RFP: kernel-patch-voluntary-preempt -- lower kernel latency by voluntary preemption

Hello! [Thu, 19 Aug 2004] guenter geiger wrote: > Hmm, I probably won't find the time to package this. A kernel patch is > quite different from a kernel module package. With dh-kpatches it seems to be even easier... > I agree, that it would be nice to have it though, especially if we could > lob

RFP: kernel-patch-voluntary-preempt -- lower kernel latency by voluntary preemption

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Hi debian-multimedia! Who is interested in packaging this? I can't do it because I only have my powerpc to test on which voluntary-preempt is not yet available for. I know Guenter already did realtime-lsm (hint..). Someone from Agnula? Thanks. Robert.

Re: jack-audio-connection-kit 0.98.1

Hello! I uploaded JACK to unstable. 4 successfull builds by now. Sparc is failing in atomicity.h. I don't know if I have time to fix that before I leave for vacation tomorrow but I will try. Robert. -- If Machiavelli were a hacker, he'd have worked for the CSSG. -- Phil

jack-audio-connection-kit 0.98.1

Hi all! I think it would be nice to have JACK 0.98 in sarge. Compatibility seems to be really good. What is the general opinion about uploading JACK to unstable now? Robert. -- Worst Vegetable of the Year: The brussels sprout. This is also the worst vegetable of next year.

Re: JACK 0.98.1 in experimental

Hello! [Sat, 15 May 2004] Jack O'Quin wrote: > Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I'd like to know where and why "jackd -dalsa" doesn't startup something > > usefull. We should work on that. > > It does, doesn't it?

Re: JACK 0.98.1 in experimental

Hello! [Thu, 13 May 2004] guenter geiger wrote: > On 13 May 2004, Jack O'Quin wrote: > > My feeling is that we should leave this as an obscure feature for > > expert users to experiment with at this point. Eventually, full > > support will evolve, but that will take a while. > > Agreed. Its a re

JACK 0.98.1 in experimental

Hi all. JACK 0.98.1 is in experimental. It should not break binary compatibility but adds the nice feature of automatically starting jackd based on ~/.jackdrc or /etc/jackdrc if $JACK_START_SERVER is set. That plays really nicely with the recent addition of the realtime-module (thanks to Guenter!)

Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: RFC: EXP merge of OSX portability work

Hello! [Wed, 24 Mar 2004] Jack O'Quin wrote: > They should be, and they usually are, but it's not guaranteed. With > autoconf, users need not have the full developer tool chain installed. > So, it's important that all the front-end generated files be up to > date. Debian deals with these issues

Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: RFC: EXP merge of OSX portability work

Hello! [Tue, 23 Mar 2004] Jack O'Quin wrote: > > it works after building it in the cvs checkout dir and then doing make > > dist. > > I always run `make' before `make dist' or `make distcheck'. I do that > to ensure that all distributed files are up-to-date. This is what the > "Goat Book" (_GNU

Re: jack 0.94.0-2

Hello! [Fri, 27 Feb 2004] Free Ekanayaka wrote: > Given that I don't know this issue indepth, I thought it was > necessary to rebuild all jack related applications against this new > release. If I am wrong, that is no ABI/API changes were introduced and From 0.75.0 (or something like

Re: jack 0.94.0-2

sion of the jack library can > only be used with the same version of the jack server. Yes, I am quite aware of the problem. I was thinking of adding a conflicts against every possible version of libjack (only about 5 of them so far?) and having libjack provide a Provides: jackd-interface Co

jack 0.94.0-2

Hello! I'm preparing jack-audio-connection-kit_0.94.0-2. Available from: jack-audio-connection-kit (0.94.0-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control: libjack0.80.0-dev is Section: libdevel * debian/jackd.README.Debian, debian/rules: add a lot of

Re: JACK 0.91.1-1

Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike Furr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ove Kaaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Turbo Fredriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The solution would be to somehow automatically recompile everything > against jack. This is the

Re: JACK 0.91.1-1

Hello! [Mon, 12 Jan 2004] guenter geiger wrote: > Looks good to me - only did some barebone tests, qjackctl and ladcca > compiled against 0.80.0 work. > > Anyhow, now that 0.75.0 is in testing we can go ahead and upload > to unstable directly. Jack related packages will have to be > recompiled an

Re: JACK 0.91.1-1

Hello! > Great! I'm going to try it ASAP (tomorrow, I think). > > P.S.: do you keep your packaging work under CVS or something like > that? In my local (offline) subversion repository. Hmm. If there is really need, I'll move it to svn.debian.org. Robert. -- It was kinda like stuffing

JACK 0.91.1-1

Hi! I suggest the following new JACK package: http://people.debian.org/~jordens/debs/new-jack/jack-audio-connection-kit_0.91.1-1_i386.changes jack-audio-connection-kit (0.91.1-1) experimental; urgency=low . * New upstream release + does not break binary compatibility + enable expe

Re: jack 0.80.0

hes/03_cycles-h-other-archs.patch: partially integrated upstream * debian/patches/03_cpuinfo_other_archs.patch: parses cpuinfo on other architectures by Junichi Uekawa; closes: #207435 * debian/control: changed [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#205552: jack-audio-connection-kit: new upstream release available

Hello! [Mon, 25 Aug 2003] Jack O'Quin wrote: > But, we have actually done a rather good job on binary compatibility. > It pains me to get no credit for this. With only a few exceptions, > most JACK releases in the past year or two *have* been binary > compatible with the older versions. We all

Re: Bug#205552: jack-audio-connection-kit: new upstream release available

Hello! [Mon, 25 Aug 2003] Andrea Glorioso wrote: > > "ju" == Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > ju> The new version of jack library will be called libjack0.71.2-0 > ju> (although it is of version 0.75.0-1) > > Sorry for the dumb question, but what are the reasons for this

Re: Bug#205552: jack-audio-connection-kit: new upstream release available

Hello! [Fri, 22 Aug 2003] Uekawa, Junichi wrote: > I'm rather convinced that there should be a new version. > I'm moving this discussion to multimedia, but I think most of this is > summed up now > > [New Version of Jack to hit unstable] > > The new version of Jack 0.75 will be uploaded RSN. >