Re: Bug#592515: future unblock: nama/1.064-1 (or -2)
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 05:13:44AM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 0, Ansgar Burchardt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I see two possible solutions to include the RC bug fix in Squeeze:
> > a) Allow both nama/1.064-1 and the (new) libaudio-ecasound-perl to
> > migrate to testing. However I guess the release team is not happy about
> > including new packages at this point.
> > b) Preparing a -2 revision of nama that drops the new Recommends and
> > allowing it to migrate.
> I'd prefer the latter. It would also be nice to document changes in the
> changelog files so that ignorant people like me know why that $package
> has been recommanded.
Here is my reply as Nama's author.
Nama is a UI that manipulates Ecasound, an external audio
Ecasound has a couple different control interfaces.
libaudio-ecasound-perl offers control through a
C-library interface, libecasoundc.
A second interface is via socket to an Ecasound process
running in --server mode.
Nama supports both, using libecasoundc (via
libaudio-ecasound-perl) when available, otherwise
defaulting to Net-ECI, the socket interface.
Although the two are similar, having different code paths for
achieving the same behavior is useful for troubleshooting.
Control via libecasoundc (libaudio-ecasound-perl) has
a couple advantages that lead me to choose it as
the preferable option (therefore recommended):
* it is more mature and well tested than my naive socket programming
* the library manages the starting and killing of the
There are no changes to Nama associated with the
"Recommends:" line, only the availability of a Debian
packaged version of interface module.
> Mehdi Dogguy