Bug#778546: RFS: miceamaze/4.2-1 -- video game with mice in a maze
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Raphaël Champeimont wrote:
> I have (I hope) addressed the blocking issue and some of
> your recommendations also.
You have addressed the blocking issue, uploaded to Debian.
> I'm not sure I can fix this, because all I do is ask for SDL to setup a
> full-screen OpenGL display, but don't think it is possible to specify
> the behavior on multi-screen.
It sounds like SDL2 might have better support for this.
> Yes. Actually I had checked this list and noticed nothing applied for
> miceamaze.
> I have added the changelog entry.
BTW, since that entry isn't related to the new upstream release there
was no need to indent it under that item in debian/changelog.
> Did I do that? The only thing I changed is "experimental" instead of
> "unstable".
> Is it what you are talking about?
I'm talking about the change from Priority optional to extra in
debian/control, which you mentioned in the debian/changelog entry for
1.8-2.
> Last time I checked, SDL2 was not shipped with most linux distributions
> (in stable releases) so I wanted to wait.
Fair enough.
> I'm surprised because gcc never complained about missing includes.
> I will look into that later (this is not fixed in this release).
The includes aren't completely missing so gcc would not complain, the
include-what-you-use tool complains about indirectly including headers
via other headers instead of directly including them, when you
directly use their functions/macros/classes. The reason is that doing
only direct includes reduces the amount of code the compiler has to
parse, which speeds things up. It also helps with the other goal of
include-what-you-use, which is to remove headers that are no longer
used. At least this is how I interpret it.
> I agress this might have been another option, but actually I did not make
> this change myself and the other developped preferred to do like this.
I see. It is probably too late to change since the images are already
combined and can't be un-combined unless the other developer has a
copy of the original images? Perhaps you could discuss the idea with
them?
> That's true but I cannot provide anything better because I just downloaded
> it like this and did not change anything.
I see. It is a bit sad you can't change the music in the same ways as
the original person did, but that is your choice I guess.
> So if I want to fix that, I should build two packages:
> miceamaze with the binary file and miceamaze-data with the rest?
Indeed, some info about that on the wiki.
https://wiki.debian.org/PkgSplit
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: