FS#25683 - [libffado] need a rebuild against dbus-c++

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Bernardo Barros (smoge) - Saturday, 20 August 2011, 02:37 GMT
Last edited by Ray Rashif (schivmeister) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 19:18 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Ray Rashif (schivmeister)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
We need the inclusion of dbus-c++ in [extra] and recompile libffado, then ffado-mixer from the libffado package will work.

Additional info:
* package version: libffado 2.0.1-3

Steps to reproduce: try to start 'ffado-mixer'
This task depends upon

Closed by  Ray Rashif (schivmeister)
Sunday, 21 August 2011, 19:18 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Comment by Ray Rashif (schivmeister) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 16:14 GMT
  • Field changed: Severity (High → Medium)
As far as I can see dbus-c++ is included in the ffado buildsystem:

./external/dbus/include/dbus-c++

Are you sure it's not something else? Have you rebuilt yourself and confirmed it to work?
Comment by Bernardo Barros (smoge) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 17:59 GMT
Yes, it works for me! Without dbus-c++ I get an error in the configuration phase.
I used the dbus-c++ package from archaudio
Comment by Ray Rashif (schivmeister) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 18:19 GMT
Are you sure you're talking about extra/libffado and not aur/libffado-svn? I cannot reproduce any configuration error. Please build in a chroot, i.e sudo extra-i686-build or sudo extra-x86_64-build depending on your architecture.

dbus-c++ is needed for ffado trunk, i.e libffado-svn, because it is no longer included.
Comment by Bernardo Barros (smoge) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 18:54 GMT
sorry Ray, I use -svn and if it's different you're probably right.

Anyway would be nice to use the svn version, other distros are using it,
like fedora:

http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-May/059448.html

Comment by Ray Rashif (schivmeister) - Sunday, 21 August 2011, 19:18 GMT
Yes, it would be nice, if upstream were to say "we will not make releases anymore" or "distributors should package our development tree" or "our stable releases are not stable (because they are too old to be so)" :)

Anyway, I'll ask upstream.

Loading...