Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 120470

Summary: ebuild for darkice 0.17 (version bump)
Product: Gentoo Linux Reporter: Ákos Maróy <akos>
Component: New packagesAssignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: enhancement    
Priority: High    
Version: 2005.0   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
URL: http://darkice.sourceforge.net/
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---
Attachments: ebuild for darkice 0.17

Description Ákos Maróy 2006-01-26 14:46:41 UTC
please find an ebuild for darkice 0.17 attached.

please also note that this version of darkice may use twolame for MPEG2 support. I also submitted a twolame ebuild for this regard.

for lack of a better USE flag, I added mp2 to make darkice use twolame.
Comment 1 Ákos Maróy 2006-01-26 14:47:03 UTC
Created attachment 78226 [details]
ebuild for darkice 0.17
Comment 2 Ákos Maróy 2006-01-26 14:47:48 UTC
see bug #120469 for the twolame ebuild:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=120469
Comment 3 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-01-26 14:50:16 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 110124 ***
Comment 4 Ákos Maróy 2006-01-26 14:54:59 UTC
what do you mean by duplicate? this is version 0.17, bug #110124 is version 0.16

I also wonder what the cycle is to get into x86. the latest darkice version that is not ~x86 is version 0.14, which was released in 2004(!). 0.15 is in the main portage tree as ~x86 (released almost a year ago), while 0.16 is not even in the official portage tree (released 3 months ago)

this is despite me providing all the ebuilds right at release time...
Comment 5 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-01-26 15:05:18 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> what do you mean by duplicate? this is version 0.17, bug #110124 is version
> 0.16

I mean that we are not interested in duplicate version bump bugs.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 110124 ***
Comment 6 Ákos Maróy 2006-01-26 15:07:51 UTC
you mean I should post the new ebuild to bug #110124 instead?