Re: Bug#170843: status of patch
On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 14:46, Christian Marillat wrote:
> James D Strandboge <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > I was just wondering what is the status of this patch? I looked at
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=170843 and it doesn't
> > look like anything is happening with it. I can say that it has been
> > working flawlessly for 3 weeks now on my system.
> Because esound doesn't load is config file in /etc/esound/esd.conf
> And if your read gnome.bugzilla.org this bug has been already reported.
I read http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88253, before which is
why I came up with this patch in the first. If I understand correctly,
esd.conf is supposed to be used for autospawn only. If you start up esd
from the command line, or the way gnome does, esd.conf is not brought
in. That esd only reads esd.conf in autospawn mode is an esd bug, and
this patch doesn't fix this issue.
> Then your patche is simply a workaround and not a definitive patche.
But, I do not agree that this is just a workaround. esd by itself will
honor ESD_SPAWN_OPTIONS, but gnome-session doesn't because of the way
esd is started. Since gnome-session is starting esd, isn't it
reasonable to have gnome-session pass ESD_SPAWN_OPTIONS to esd? I think
so. A separate esound patch regarding esd.conf should be made, but this
patch addresses a different (albeit related) issue. Granted, if the
esd.conf patch was there, we may not be having this conversation, but
that doesn't necessarily mean that this isn't a proper fix. Both should
What is your thinking?
PS-- because I was working with a debian package, I issued the report
through the debian bug tracker. Is it your opinion that I should have
through bugzilla.gnome.org and just have upstream deal with it? I
would get a coppy of this based on what reportbug said.
GPG/PGP ID: 26384A3A
Fingerprint: D9FF DF4A 2D46 A353 A289 E8F5 AA75 DCBE 2638 4A3A