|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > October 2005 > gnome-1 transition
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
gnome-1 transition
|
|
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2005-10-07, 2:57 am |
|
A few weeks ago, libpng10-0 was removed from the archive. A
consequence of this was that all gnome-1 packages (and there are a
number still around) instantly became FTBFS.
I am now the de-facto gnome-1 tsar, but I don't intend to do much
other than keep things limping along. I am doing this because
gnucash, an important package IMHO, and which I maintain, requires
gnome-1 for the time being.
The gnome-1 core libraries have now been uploaded in versions that use
libpng12-0 instead of libpng10-0. They are still working their way
through the autobuilders, at different rates on different archs.
Packages which link against gnome-1 core libraries should now rebuild,
and specify versioned dependencies against the new uploads when they
become available. The relevant versions to depend on are as follows
(these are the source package names):
libgnome 1.4.2-24
gnome-print 0.37-10
bonobo 1.0.22-5
libcapplet 1:1.5.11-11
gtkhtml 1.1.10-8
libglade 1:0.17-4
gal 0.24-4
guppi 0.40.3-15
In addition, if you use any of the imlib or gdk-imlib packages, you
need the new versions (which have a new source package name):
imlib1-dev -> imlib11-dev
gdk-imlib1-dev -> gdk-imlib11-dev
Please recompile and upload packages which you maintain as these
versions become available on the arch you use for development work.
When you have recompiled, please *check* to make sure that the only
libpng linked into your package is libpng12-0, and that no imlib1
(only imlib11) packages are linked in. (The best course is to have
none of the old -dev libraries even installed when you build.)
I apologize for this happening while we're trying to get the C++
transition completed. It was not my choice to drop libpng10-0; I'm
only trying to patch things back together as expeditiously as possible
after that happened.
Once all the new libraries are available on the most common archs, I'm
going to propose a mass-bug-filing to request recompilation on those
packages that still need it, so that the old libpng10-0 and imlib1
binary libraries can be deleted from unstable.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Loïc Minier 2005-10-07, 7:50 am |
| Hi,
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> A few weeks ago, libpng10-0 was removed from the archive. A
> consequence of this was that all gnome-1 packages (and there are a
> number still around) instantly became FTBFS.
(s/FTBFS/uninstallable?)
> Packages which link against gnome-1 core libraries should now rebuild,
> and specify versioned dependencies against the new uploads when they
> become available. The relevant versions to depend on are as follows
> (these are the source package names):
Do you have a list of the relevant packages (preferably with
maintainers)?
Cheers,
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Lionel Elie Mamane 2005-10-07, 7:50 am |
| On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 12:00:44PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> (s/FTBFS/uninstallable?)
Both, because libgnome-dev became uninstallable, thus all build-deps FTBFS
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Do you have a list of the relevant packages (preferably with
> maintainers)?
The libpng maintainer has already contacted the maintainers and filed
bugs, hasn't he?
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Adeodato Simó 2005-10-07, 7:50 am |
| * Thomas Bushnell BSG [Thu, 06 Oct 2005 18:53:34 -0700]:
> Please recompile and upload packages which you maintain as these
> versions become available on the arch you use for development work.
> When you have recompiled, please *check* to make sure that the only
> libpng linked into your package is libpng12-0, and that no imlib1
> (only imlib11) packages are linked in. (The best course is to have
> none of the old -dev libraries even installed when you build.)
Oh!, the irony.
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve...9/msg01242.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve...9/msg01246.html)
--
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
Aim for the impossible and you will achieve the improbable.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2005-10-09, 8:50 pm |
| Lo=C3=AFc Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> (s/FTBFS/uninstallable?)
No, FTBFS, because they couldn't be compiled against packages
(libpng10-0-dev) that no longer existed in the archive.
| |
|
|
|
|
|