Re: Testing packages with openal-soft

[Andres Mejia <mcitadel@gmail.com>]

On Sunday 27 April 2008 1:55:42 am Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> On 27/04/2008, Andres Mejia wrote:
> > There it is. I really think the openal-soft library should be the new
> > "openal" library. I don't know if these could be release with Lenny
> > however.
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for your work on this. And that's exactly the point I wanted to
> raise: the timeframe to properly test those packages is really narrow.
> IIRC, there's still the freeze of non-essential toolchain (like
> debhelper, cdbs) before the full freeze happens, but in case we're
> switching to openal-soft, the decision should be made very quickly.
>
> Questions that come to mind (answers might be contained in previous
> mails, but let's ask them all anyway):
>  - Can both libs coexist?

No. The reason is because of the dev packages. Only one can have the 
name "openal" (for using -lopenal flags) and one can have the include dir 
path of /usr/include/AL.

>  - If so, is it possible to release the packages that aren't working
>    (yet?) with openal-soft with the old/unmaintained openal? Same thing
>    for the packages that might appear buggy with openal-soft.
>
> In any cases, I think it's urgent to communicate and coordinate with all
> reverse dependencies, so that they are aware of that new library, can
> eventually help get in touch with upstream and help testing the switch,
> and possibly give us their opinion on the whole picture.
>
> Mraw,
> KiBi.



-- 
Regards,
Andres