[Bug 1030] Review request: xbmc - Media center
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030
--- Comment #46 from Alex Lancaster <alexl(a)users.sourceforge.net> 2010-01-21
10:28:09 ---
(In reply to comment #45)
(In reply to comment #42)
> I added next 3 patches to trac: http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/8590
Thanks.
> Patch8: xbmc-9.11-spyce.diff
This fixes python-2.6 syntax errors (the syntax of the sources xbmc has merged
into their source-tree is invalid)
OK, is it fixed in trunk?
> Patch9: xbmc-9.11-RandomNumberGenerators.hpp.diff
This is a fix to a minor but quite obious bug - Without this patch, the code is
more or less useless.
There are plans to move to libprojectM 2.0.1 in trunk, I think, but I don't
think they have as yet:
http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/8277
and ultimately we should be compiling against the external version:
http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/8408
so is it still worth submitting this patch upstream??
> Ralf this fixes GCC warning: partial backport to 9.11, will this
be fixed in
> next release?
Well, much of this patch is from xbxc's svn-trunk.
It is not fixed on 9.11_branch.
> Do we need to report upstream?
I think so. This bug (a memory-leak) is still in 9.11_branch.
> Patch11: xbmc-9.11-changeset-26191.diff
OK, but the next 10.x version will presumably be from trunk, so I don't know if
there is a point in resubmitting it as a trac ticket upstream, they'd probably
just close as being fixed in trunk. I don't think xbmc upstream make point
releases based on the branches AFAIK, except for the "Live" version, and in
this case, we are effectively "Live".
> This fixes problems with web server segfaulting on x86_64, I
submitted
> http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/8591
> Patch12: xbmc-9.11-GoAhead.diff
This was submitted and they immediately closed it, apparently goahead is about
to be replaced: http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/8591#comment:1
Thanks - FWIW: I am having some problems in keeping keeping the
pace/synch-ing
my packages with you, because I have several further patches applied locally
and am testing them.
I'll leave updating the spec for a while to give you a chance to test them.
Perhaps you could just make the modifications relative to my last (-8) spec
file, update the changelog and then attach it (and any new patches) right to
this bug. Then I can roll a new srpm.
Also: are you willing to actually review this? Or is there somebody who is,
since nobody has yet volunteered.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.