On 2/15/11 7:12 AM, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Dave Beckett wrote:
>
>> An aside at Ardour:
>> If I look in sid at ardour, it says:
>> Build-Depend:
>> ... libraptor1 (>= 1.4.19), librasqal2 (>= 0.9.18), librdf0 (>= 1.0.9),
>>
>> which is shortly going to break since the latest librdf0 will shortly
Dave Beckett wrote:
> An aside at Ardour:
> If I look in sid at ardour, it says:
> Build-Depend:
> ... libraptor1 (>= 1.4.19), librasqal2 (>= 0.9.18), librdf0 (>= 1.0.9),
>
> which is shortly going to break since the latest librdf0 will shortly
> require librasqal3 and libraptor2. If ardour reall
On 1/21/10 3:51 AM, Benjamin Scherrer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I also asked at the Ardour forums about this problem.
> (http://ardour.org/node/3287)
>
> As advices there, a quick
> ln -s /usr/lib/librasqal.so.2 /usr/lib/librasqal.so.1
> as root solved my problems.
That seems indicates ardour must have b
On 1/21/10 2:26 AM, Benjamin Scherrer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this bug seems to be still active to me. I'm up to date on Debian
> testing amd64 with the versions:
>
> ardour 2.8.4-3
> librdf0 1.0.10-1
> librdf0-dev 1.0.10-1
> librasqal2 0.9.17-1
> librasqal2-dev 0.9.17-1
>
> But I still get this consol
Hi,
I also asked at the Ardour forums about this problem.
(http://ardour.org/node/3287)
As advices there, a quick
ln -s /usr/lib/librasqal.so.2 /usr/lib/librasqal.so.1
as root solved my problems.
Best
Benjamin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subje
Hi,
this bug seems to be still active to me. I'm up to date on Debian
testing amd64 with the versions:
ardour 2.8.4-3
librdf0 1.0.10-1
librdf0-dev 1.0.10-1
librasqal2 0.9.17-1
librasqal2-dev 0.9.17-1
But I still get this console output:
$ /usr/bin/ardour2
/usr/lib/ardour2/ardour-2.8.4: error wh
Dave Beckett writes:
>
>>From the stack trace I can see a problem - the librdf is calling the old
> rasqal ABI (0.9.16) in librasqal.so.1 rather than the new (0.9.17) in
> librasqal.so.2. (Assuming these are redland librdf 1.0.10 and rasqal librdf
> 0.9.17)
>
> redland 1.0.10 (librdf.so.0) was p
Adrian Knoth wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 05:02:21PM +0100, hungerburg wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>> the last time I used ardour two days ago. I believe it was
>> 1:2.8.4-1 - today after updating to 1:2.8.4-2 I can no longer
>> launch the application. A downgrade does not help. Maybe its
>> because a f
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 05:02:21PM +0100, hungerburg wrote:
Hi!
> the last time I used ardour two days ago. I believe it was
> 1:2.8.4-1 - today after updating to 1:2.8.4-2 I can no longer
> launch the application. A downgrade does not help. Maybe its
> because a file changed that ardour uses but
Package: ardour-i686
Version: 1:2.8.4-2
Severity: grave
the last time I used ardour two days ago. I believe it was
1:2.8.4-1 - today after updating to 1:2.8.4-2 I can no longer
launch the application. A downgrade does not help. Maybe its
because a file changed that ardour uses but that is in anot
10 matches
Mail list logo
