Debian 6.5b1 Package

[jay_cee_in_da_house]

Has your remote been working ok? On my SB1 - While I can add/play individual tracks from the remote, I can't add/play albums or artists. It says its adding them to the playlist, but then the playlist remains empty.

[kdf]

like this?
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3654

[jay_cee_in_da_house]

Sure seems to be. I exclusively browse by artist (and then try to add/play entire albums from within browse-by-artist), but I went back and tried browse-by-album and sure enough was able to get it to play.

Looks like you guys are on top of it and I'll use browse-by-album as a workaround...thanks!

[smc2911]

I've just noticed that 'pause' on the web UI doesn't seem to work (it does using the remote). Has anyone else seen this? I'm using 6.5b1 - 9193 - Debian.

[cybersnoop]

Why is the "stable main" source now supplying 7.0a? I hoped that I could have used this to keep 6.5beta's until (or even after) the 6.5 release.

Are you planning on changing this or will you not supply a stable repository for 6.5?

[Ben Sandee]

On 8/29/06, cybersnoop <
cybersnoop.2db0tb1156859401 (AT) no-...limdevices.com> wrote:
>
>
> Why is the "stable main" source now supplying 7.0a? I hoped that I could
> have used this to keep 6.5beta's until (or even after) the 6.5 release.
>
> Are you planning on changing this or will you not supply a stable
> repository for 6.5?


Looks to me like this is already partially fixed. There are now both stable
and unstable distributions (stable=6.5, unstable=7.0). Only potential
problem is that the unstable distribution doesn't have any of the other
specialized dependencies -- but I could be misunderstanding the situation.
I would guess it is a work-in-progress still.

Ben

[Ben Sandee]

On 8/29/06, Ben Sandee <tbsandee (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
>
>
> Looks to me like this is already partially fixed. There are now both
> stable and unstable distributions (stable= 6.5, unstable=7.0). Only
> potential problem is that the unstable distribution doesn't have any of the
> other specialized dependencies -- but I could be misunderstanding the
> situation. I would guess it is a work-in-progress still.
>

I'll reply to myself -- it does look like something isn't quite right or
finished with the debian repository and the updated branches. The build
that apt-get picks up is the 7.0 build, although there is a 6.5 build in the
repository. The 6.5 build is also 20mb which is twice the size of the 7.0build.

[cybersnoop]

On 8/29/06, Ben Sandee <tbsandee (AT)
I'll reply to myself -- it does look like something isn't quite right or
finished with the debian repository and the updated branches. The build
that apt-get picks up is the 7.0 build, although there is a 6.5 build in the
repository. The 6.5 build is also 20mb which is twice the size of the 7.0build.

I'm have absolutely no idea how debian packaging should work exactly, but I do see the Packages.gz in the stable dir points to the 7.0a release. This may be due to the Makefile, which is building the same Packages.gz for stable and unstable (which can't be good).

It seems like they have the right intentions, just hope I will get it to downgrade when they get the repository right.

[Dan Sully]

* cybersnoop shaped the electrons to say...

>I'm have absolutely no idea how debian packaging should work exactly,
>but I do see the 'Packages.gz in the stable dir'
>(http://debian.slimdevices.com/dists/...86/Packages.gz)
>points to the 7.0a release. This -may- be due to the 'Makefile'
>(http://debian.slimdevices.com/Makefile), which is building the same
>Packages.gz for stable and unstable (which can't be good).
>
>It seems like they have the right intentions, just hope I will get it
>to downgrade when they get the repository right.

I'm at a conference in Birmingham, UK right now - I'll see about fixing all this.

-D
--
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

[PRJ]

It looks like the stable Packages.gz is pointing to the unstable 7.0 version.

Phil