Proven Packager help needed for alsa-lib

[Michael Schwendt]

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 08:26:07 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:

> > It would have been possible for you to work around the missing
> > #include by adding it to the source code you wanted to build. Never
> > has there been a requirement to "wait for alsa-lib".
> > 
> 
> Sure, but my interpretation of the problem is that this was causing
> FTBFS on any package in F19 that was trying to BuildRequires:
> alsa-lib-devel because of changes made in GCC. It seems like the
> correct behavior for alsa-lib to restore the existing functionality
> than to force all downstreams to include a hack around the problem.
> And it was nice and easy.

Of course! Just to be clear, I didn't object to fixing alsa-lib.

I'm not convinced *all* alsa-lib-devel API users are affected by that
problem, however. For example, Audacious Plugins' ALSA driver includes
<alsa/asoundlib.h> from alsa-lib-devel and has not failed during rebuilds
in Rawhide or elsewhere - it includes a couple of other C StdLib headers
(such as stdint.h). The ticket in bugzilla has been opened end of 2012
already, and no other packager has joined there.
 
> But yes, I certainly follow your point about his particular package
> having the *option* of hacking around it if there was an urgent need.

That's what I meant. :)

-- 
Fedora release 19 (Schrödinger’s Cat) - Linux 3.9.0-0.rc5.git1.301.fc19.x86_64
loadavg: 0.19 0.71 0.43