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

Bug#572415: marked as done (RFP: muroard -- minimalist sound server for RoarAudio protocol)



Your message dated Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:51:01 +0100
with message-id <4BA6A2D5.4040600@debian.org>
and subject line whooooops..
has caused the Debian Bug report #572415,
regarding RFP: muroard -- minimalist sound server for RoarAudio protocol
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
572415: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=572415
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

* Package name    : muRoarD
  Version         : 0.1beta0
  Upstream Author : Philipp "ph3-der-loewe" Schafft <lion@lion.leolix.org>
* URL             : http://roaraudio.keep-cool.org/
* License         : GPLv3
  Programming Lang: C
  Description     : minimalist sound server for RoarAudio protocol


muRoarD is a sound server implementing the RoarAudio protocol.
This sound server package contains a sound server that is designed to be
very small and fast unlike the main sound server roard what is designed to
support as much features of the protocol as possible. It supports only the
waveform subsystem at the moment.

muRoarD currently requires libmuroar > 0.1rc2 as build dependency and
has no runtime dependencys.



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
already submitted #574895, I were a bit too fast :)
--
/*
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards,
 Patrick Matthäi
 GNU/Linux Debian Developer

E-Mail: pmatthaei@debian.org
        patrick@linux-dev.org

Comment:
Always if we think we are right,
we were maybe wrong.
*/


--- End Message ---

Reply to: