| Re: [proaudio] ardour2 problems |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/proaudio Archives
]
- To: proaudio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [proaudio] ardour2 problems
- From: "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 17:52:11 -0700
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=tc1YzxD480R9++Z4m6ugatYw0LTJu6F5oKRAE2PSGn9T6zOJkBcyeAN1xdMPU5dRkm2Xnoy0B1jL/Kob2zoeNqCtLQ7UcYZvWJd67prvsVNgUfiD9kch+5rTwrrN+QaAYnOYfIyAeaKUTl64RL5pEMI2Gn8YQX2kY/2DZFZf/sE=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jca/mqZDIAvN7OPYD6pbxlNhczjhGxfdm/C+tjldkmddxsqJAdTUE6uFblAfmQnoBDAFdfTa06E0d0/lcwWmCsxcpwTVfrWXtnwwlwlwEjvhFVN/8c4iPpn4XtxQhD+080HbEAgtS0tfYs0KJoLbDg8Gkg9SDdyLjXffDiNB1mM=
On 5/1/07, Thomas Kuther <gimpel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Di, 01.05.07 14:09 "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This looks suspect:
>
> Instead try emerge =ardour-99992 please
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
Looks indeed ugly, but ardour2 ebuikds are deprecated.
Please do as the ebuild says.
Best,
Tom
Hi Tom,
OK, so I guess I didn't look carefully enough at everything eix was
telling me?
lightning ~ # eix ardour
* media-sound/ardour
Available versions:
(0) ~0.99.2 ~0.99.2[1] ~0.99.3 ~0.99.3[1] **99991[1]
(1) ~*2.0_rc2[1] ~*2.0[1] **99992[1]
{altivec debug nls sse vst}
Homepage: http://ardour.org/
Description: multi-track hard disk recording software
* media-sound/ardour2 [1]
Available versions: (~*)2.0_rc1 (**)9999 {altivec debug nls sse vst}
Homepage: http://ardour.org/
Description: multi-track hard disk recording software
[1] /usr/portage/local/layman/pro-audio
Found 2 matches.
lightning ~ #
Are you suggesting that I'm supposed to emerge 'ardour' and not 'ardour2'?
Looking at the revisions I suppose that ardour-99991 is ardour from
CVS while ardour-99992 is ardour2 from CVS? If so I find that
confusing.
Emerging -99992 now. Very strange!
Thanks!
- Mark