[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Advice with uncooperative maintainers

Le mer 11/08/2004 à 14:11, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
> On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 14:00 +0200, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> > > Well, personally I wouldn't mind a more actively maintained esound; the
> > > current version in Debian is pretty old, and the later upstream versions
> > > fixes quite a lot of bugs.  To be able to use esd on my laptops, I have
> > > created my own packages of v0.2.34 instead, but I would really prefer
> > > having a working package in the Debian archives...
> > I've done exactly the same thing[1] because ESD 0.2.29 with ALSA really
> > doesn't make it.
> > Most of the patches (if not all) applied in the current Debian packages
> > no longer make sense, if they did someday.
> > 
> > [1] available for Sarge at http://apt.bxlug.be/sarge/main/ (and sources
> > available at http://apt.bxlug.be/sarge/sources/).
> Have you created new patch and put it in BTS?  Also when removing debian
> patches, have you reviewed what they are for and if they are neccessary
> and not and after that have you submited this information to BTS?
No, I haven't because the patch would not apply to version in Debian
(0.2.29). But the diff.gz is available at afore-mentioned url.
I removed all patches together because:
- most don't apply anymore to 0.2.34 (because it has been fixed
- without them (and still, with version 0.2.34 of course), I'm not
having any problem they were once supposed to work around

Of course I should have analyzed each one before removing, but isn't it
the work of the maintainer?

> I am just saying that making own packages and uploading to web
> somewhere, doesn't help much (neither you nor debian)...
Of course it helps! I'm having a lot trouble less now that I use my
packages. They are now used on at least 5 PC used daily without any
problem, and for more than one month now.
I use them with ALSA (and used to use one with OSS till this morning).
Of course, I did not test them on other architecture than i386.

> doesn't make sen
> O.
Jérôme Warnier

Reply to: