Re: [proaudio] Ecasound

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.tuxfamily.org/proaudio Archives ]


On Wednesday 27 Oct 2010 06:50:40 alex stone wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Gavin Pryke <gavinlee303@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 Oct 2010 12:54:30 alex stone wrote:
> >> Can i respectfully request an updated ebuild for Ecasound, from 2.6.0,
> >> to the current 2.7.2?
> >> 
> >> Thanks.
> >> 
> >> Alex.
> > 
> > Hi Alex
> > 
> > I'm not familiar with ecasound but looking at the output of eix I don't
> > see it in the pro-audio tree, it seems to be in portage proper, maybe
> > you could file a bug on bugs.gentoo.org and ask for it to be bumped
> > there? I don't mean to sound funny or anything about this but if a
> > package is in the portage tree already then in my humble opinion it
> > makes sense for Gentoo developers to maintain it rather than duplicate
> > the effort in the pro-audio overlay.
> > 
> > Please see this list for all ecasound bugs, I notice a bump request for
> > 2.7.1: http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL+ecasound
> > 
> > I looked briefly at the homepage of Nama but I have little experience
> > packaging perl applications on Gentoo and the dependencies look tricky to
> > get right.
> > It looks as though Nama could be installed by g-cpan somehow or maybe a
> > nama-9999 ebuild could possibly be made.
> > 
> > Sorry I couldn't be of more help and thanks for your emails.
> > 
> > Best regards
> > Gavin
> 
> Gavin, for your info, Nama can be installed from the git repo, using
> normal configure, make, make install. portage has all the dependencies
> already (Ecasound version not withstanding). Maybe it's easier than we
> think. :)
> 
> Alex.

Checking out the Nama git repo I see there is no autoconf configure script in 
the tree, it's a Makefile.PL. I will have a deeper look at some point but no 
promises on an ebuild just yet. :)

Gav



Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/