Re: libmtp7 -> libmtp8 transition
* Adeodato Simó <dato@net.com.org.es> [2009-03-07 20:29]:
> * Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 22 Feb 2009 12:38:01 +0100]:
>
> > #516559 audacious-plugins: FTBFS against libmtp-dev 0.3.6 now in unstable
> > #516563 gnomad2: FTBFS against libmtp-dev 0.3.6 now in unstable
> > #516564 rhythmbox: FTBFS against libmtp-dev 0.3.6 now in unstable
>
> It's been two weeks now without fixes for these. Do you think you could
> take care of NMUing, Rafael?
All done now:
#516559
Changes:
audacious-plugins (1.5.1-2.1) unstable; urgency=low
.
* NMU for helping with the libmtp7 -> libmtp8 transition, with the
authorization of the Release Team
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/03/msg00085.html)
* debian/patches/004-compile-with-libmtp8.patch: New patch for fixing
the new number of arguments in function LIBMTP_Send_Track_From_File
(closes: #516559)
* debian/audacious-plugins-extra.install: Do not install musepack.so, as
this plugin is not built anymore when the current version of
libmpcdec-dev now in unstable (1:0.1~r435-1) is used. This is related
to Bug#518679. In this bug report, a patch was proposed for
src/musepack/libmpc.h, but it does actually not work. This version of
audacious-plugins-extra will not ship the musepack plugin as in the
previous version.
#516563
Changes:
gnomad2 (2.9.1-1.2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* NMU for helping with the libmtp7 -> libmtp8 transition, with the
authorization of the Release Team
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/03/msg00085.html)
* src/jukebox.c: updates from upstream revno 1.123 to support libtmp8
(closes: #516563). This patch was taken from Ubuntu, thanks to
Riccardo Coccioli.
#516564
Changes:
rhythmbox (0.11.6-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
.
* NMU for helping with the libmtp7 -> libmtp8 transition, with the
authorization of the Release Team
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/03/msg00085.html)
* debian/patches/20_compile_with_libmtp8.patch: New patch for fixing
the new number of arguments in function LIBMTP_Send_Track_From_File
(closes: #516564)
--
Rafael
Reply to: