On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 11:44:50 +0100, Eric Valette <eric.valette@free.fr> wrote:
> On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> > In where? Stable? SID? Backports? FYI, you can check all
> > of this easily by yourself using packages.debian.org. Or
> > are you trying to make the point that Debian has outdated
> > packages?
>
> I ask you a question: what are the version of the packeges in debian
> unstable and in debian-multimedia.org trying to be factual. I know the
> answer, I just would like someone from debian to write it down ;-)
>
> I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated.
Really?
http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/unstable/main/binary-amd64/package/vlc.php
Details for vlc (1:2.0.0-0.1)
http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/vlc
Package: vlc (2.0.0-6)
so, yes there's the spurious epoch there, but otherwise that looks like
the same latest version.
Even if you were talking about stable -- well d-m.o doesn't have a
version of vlc in its stable repository, but perhaps you're on about
stable-backports:
http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/squeeze-backports/main/binary-amd64/package/vlc.php
Details for vlc (1.1.3-1squeeze6.1)
which I must say I was surprised to see is not at the latest version,
and is not even more up to date than the stable debian version.
http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/vlc
Package: vlc (1.1.3-1squeeze6)
I presume that's why you didn't risk backing up your point with any
facts or references.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] http://www.hands.com/
|-| HANDS.COM Ltd. http://www.uk.debian.org/
|(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND
Attachment:
pgpDLLniqGMb9.pgp
Description: PGP signature