On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 07:05 +0100, Max Kellermann wrote:
> It really isn't obvious what 02_public-headers.dpatch aims to do and
> why, it looks very dangerous (which is why this bug report was
> initially written).
Ack.
> By the way, why does the patch change a string to an int8_t*?
> (NeAACDecGe
On 2008/11/17 00:47, "Matthew W. S. Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 19:13 +0100, Max Kellermann wrote:
> > There is no documentation on that issue in the Debian package - no
> > README.Debian, and no documentation in the patch file. Would you mind
> > to add it?
>
> Other
On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 19:13 +0100, Max Kellermann wrote:
> There is no documentation on that issue in the Debian package - no
> README.Debian, and no documentation in the patch file. Would you mind
> to add it?
Other than adding a note to README.Debian that a patch has been added
that makes the p
severity 505901 minor
thanks
Sorry for the traffic - after some more research, I found that the
libfaad headers are inconsistent: internally, it uses uint32_t*. This
is a very unfortante situation, since even non-bugged software will
break on Debian, assuming that passing a long pointer is correc
4 matches
Mail list logo
