Re: src:ecasound / src:ecasound2.2

2011-09-19 Thread Felipe Sateler
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:25, Alessandro Ghedini wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 06:35:30PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> What's the difference? Should ecasound2.2 be RMed? > > ecasound replaces ecasound2.2, so yes, ecasound2.2 should be removed (I > don't know how though). You need to file a

Re: src:ecasound / src:ecasound2.2

2011-09-15 Thread Alessandro Ghedini
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 06:35:30PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > What's the difference? Should ecasound2.2 be RMed? ecasound replaces ecasound2.2, so yes, ecasound2.2 should be removed (I don't know how though). Cheers -- perl -E'$_=q;$/= @{[@_]};and s;\S+;;eg;say~~reverse' __

Re: src:ecasound / src:ecasound2.2

2011-09-14 Thread Micah Gersten
On 09/14/2011 05:35 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > What's the difference? Should ecasound2.2 be RMed? > >From the Ubuntu side this would be great as with the 2.8 upload, ecasound2.2 retook the ecasound source package. This is causing the ecasound2.2 binaries to fail to upload since they're superseded

src:ecasound / src:ecasound2.2

2011-09-14 Thread Felipe Sateler
What's the difference? Should ecasound2.2 be RMed? -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintai