* John Simpson [100803 14:57 -0500]: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Elimar Riesebieter <riese...@lxtec.de> wrote: > > * John Lindgren [100803 09:22 -0400]: > >> Package: libasound2-dev > >> Version: 1.0.23-1 > >> Severity: normal > >> > >> With -std=c99 and -D_BSD_SOURCE, there is a conflict between time.h and > >> alsa/global.h. > >> > >> #include <time.h> > >> #include <alsa/asoundlib.h> > >> > >> $ gcc -c -std=c99 -D_BSD_SOURCE -Wall test.c > >> In file included from /usr/include/alsa/asoundlib.h:44, > >> from test.c:2: > >> /usr/include/alsa/global.h:137: error: redefinition of ???struct timeval??? > >> /usr/include/alsa/global.h:142: error: redefinition of ???struct > >> timespec??? > > > > So what do you expect Debian Alsa maintainers can do at this point? > > What is it exactly that the "Debian Alsa maintainers" do?
Maintaining the Debian ALSA packages
> Where should Debian Alsa bugs be reported?
If the bug is Debian ALSA packages related to the Debian BTS
> If a developer trying to use the Debian Alsa Package should not
> discuss bugs on the pkg-alsa-dev mailing list, where should that
> developer discuss them?
The Debian ALSA packages are based on the raw ALSA sources. The
packages are prepared to build on the (maeanwhile 12 or so) suported
archs. So if one wants to change the build environment and found a
bug this is really _not_ Debian related. If we can point out this we
recommend to file the _non_ Debian related bug to upstream. Those
bugs are not distribution related and should be (if any) fixed
upstream. This is users fault, though.
>
> I am sure I missed something somewhere.
Of course yes ;-)
Elimar
--
The path to source is always uphill!
-unknown-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
