[vorbis-dev] Patches and questions for spec files

[Adrien Beau]

I'm forwarding this mail, since thomasvs on #vorbis can't seem
to subscribe/send to the list. Please Cc: thomas at apestaart.org
when you answer, or write directly to him.

----- Forwarded message -----

Hi,

I've been asked by Vakor to help out on the packaging of the 1.0 release 
(for Red Hat).

(For some reason xiph.org is refusing any mail from our server, 
urgent.rug.ac.be, so I can't mail directly to the list or subscribe to 
them.  I've put the diffs which were attached to the mail in 
http://urgent.rug.ac.be/thomas/vorbis/patch/.  They're generated with
cvs diff -up)

I've spent a few hours going over everything and tweaking spec files and 
building packages and I'm pretty much through it.
Attached are the resulting patches.  I'm building packages as I write it 
and will upload them somewhere and let you know so you can test.  I'll 
also upload the disted tarballs I used for this, because I don't know if 
you will still put stuff up in cvs.

Some explanations :

a) libao: I upped the version number in configure.in since it still said 
0.8.2 while the README says 0.8.3 and on irc people tell me it will also
get a new release.
I also added alsa-lib-devel to the buildreqs since I made a package of 
0.9.0rc2 for GStreamer and thus I was able to autobuild the alsa plug-in 
as well.

b) libogg: since both redhat and ximian use the pretty awful 1.0rc3 
version name, with an Epoch in the spec, I had to pull some hairy spec 
magic to make it behave reasonably well with some automatic update tools.
It's still not perfect, but at least it has a chance of working ;)

c) libvorbis: I added a check to configure.in to detect a new function in
the final libogg version, so that it complains if you don't have libogg 
1.0 installed.
I did the same trick as for libogg wrt upgrades.  There's only one 
problem.  The so version on vorbisfile and vorbisenc has jumped from 
libvorbis*.so.0 to 2 and 3, apparently.  If this is genuinely necessary, I 
guess you should leave it as it is, but if it's not really necessary, and 
you could also get by by only changing the second so number.

The reason I'm saying this is because on a standard redhat system (with or 
without ximian), a few packages REQUIRE libvorbisfile.so.0 and 
libvorbisenc.so.0, and thus at this point users having those packages are 
unable to upgrade to the new 1.0 release without problems.
Packages in question are, among others, SDL, sox, tuxracer, xmms, and a 
few more.
Some of these are very common, so if you can, please consider the question 
if this new libtool version is really needed in this form.

I repeat : if it is not necessary, I would advise you to revert the first 
version number to 0 so that an upgrade to the new 1.0 release version is 
not too painful on your users ;)

Of course, if it is really necessary (i don't know the specifics), then 
leave it as is.  If not, please change it before doing the release :)

d) vorbis-tools: I added vcut and some man pages, nothing really special 
here.

So, please let me know what you think of these fixes and if you're going 
to put them in cvs before the release.

I'll be around on IRC for the next 8 hours regardless anyway.

I'll mail again when the packages for redhat-72-i386 and redhat-73-i386 
are done.  Please let me know if you want anything fixed or changed.

Thanks,
Thomas


-- 
The Dave/Dina Project : future TV today ! - http://davedina.apestaart.org/
<-*-                      -*->
Another Love Song
That is written
Still nothing said
<-*- thomas at apestaart.org -*->
URGent, the best radio on the Internet - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.rug.ac.be/

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-dev-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.