owner ka...@whence.com thanks
[ adding Kamil Ignacak, the new upstream author/maintainer of
unixcw/libcw ]
Hi Alexander-
Thank you very much for noticing the breakage. This does indeed result
from problems with the newly refurbished 'unixcw' source package that I
recently uploaded for Kamil ...
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 14:26 +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> tags 652618 +patch
> thanks
>
> [ adding the unixcw maintainer to the loop ]
> [ also adding Michael as Cc, as last NMUer of the package he might have
> interest in it ]
>
> Hi!
>
> * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl <toli...@debian.org> [111219 11:09]:
>
> > I'm sorry, but I fear your package will FTBFS starting with the next
> > dinstall run. Background is that unixcw dropped to build the package
> > unixcw-dev on which cwdaemon build-depends. And well... I cruft-removed
> > said package by mistake just now.
> >
> > I guess that the new build-dependency should be libcw3-dev, but I haven't
> > checked.
>
> The good news is that I kind of fixed it. The bad news is, that I can't
> test the resulting package. Also just replacing the build-depens on
> unixcw-dev with libcw3-dev didn't solved the issue, I guess that means
> that the "Provides: unixcw-dev" of libcw3-dev is not true.
You're correct. the renamed libcw3{-dev} packages don't properly
Provide unixcw{-dev}, but they should. We'll fix that.
> I had to do some further changes (see attached debdiff). To my
> understanding the calls cw_set_soundcard_sound and cw_set_console_sound
> are no longer necessary, as libcw automatically picks the right one?
Lets ask the new upstream author/maintainer... Kamil, can you comment
on that? Did you eliminate those routines from the new libcw?
> Well, at least with the attached changes it builds again. So far, so
> good, however I couldn't actually check the resulting package.
>
>
> That being said, here are a couple of questions:
>
> 1) Is this package actually being used? Orphaned since two years, no
> reverde depends (only one suggests by xlog), pretty low popcon (but a
> special package), no upstream development.
> 2) Is the patch correct? Anyone can test it?
>
> And for the Debian Hamradio Maintainers:
> 3) Shouldn't libcw3-dev have a dependency on libasound2-dev? Apparently
> that's needed for successfull linking.
> 4) Are libcw's pc files correct? As you can see, I also had to add also
> to the CFLAGS and lib calls.
> 5) Wouldn't you like to adopt cwdaemon, if it's worth to be kept?
I do think cwdaemon is worth keeping, and I will adopt it.
Kamil and I will fix unixcw/libcw3 and then I will apply whatever
remaining bits of your patch to cwdaemon are still necessary.
>
> Best Regards,
> Alexander
Thanks again!
-Kamal
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
