[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Proposed removal of packages with long-standing FTBFS failures





2008/9/6 Michel Salim <michel sylvan gmail com>
2008/9/5 David Nielsen <gnomeuser gmail com>:
>
>
> Den 5. sep. 2008 22.21 skrev Paul <paul all-the-johnsons co uk>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > monodevelop-0.19-6.fc9 [u'449441 ASSIGNED'] (build/make) pfj
>>
>> This is a pain. Every time I've tried to build MD 1.0, koji has thrown a
>> wobbler complaining that %{_libdir}/mono/gac can't be found! I will look
>> at it again over this next week though.
>
> Didn't the wonderful Michel fix this recently, he cleaned up the spec and
> bumped us succesfully to 2.0 beta.
>
I haven't touched the F-9 branch; as I'm not running F-9 anymore, and
with the changes in the Mono stack, I didn't want to risk any
breakage. Paul likely knows more about the difference between F-9's
mono and Rawhide's -- Paul, you could perhaps backport the Rawhide
monodevelop to F-9? Some of the BRs might need to be changed.

I believe the new monodevelop requires gtk-sharp-2.12 which in return will require us to push everything that depends on gtk-sharp2 (with patches or updated versions from rawhide). I would be in favor of this as it would make our Mono stack a bit more consistent across the supported platforms and it would allow us to have the same supported versions of many programs on every platform. Something like gnome-do e.g. is generally only supported in the latest release by upstream and we cannot put that in F9 because our stack cannot support it currently.

Maybe once Mono 2.0 Final hits we can decide if a coordinated push to F9 (and F8 if it is still supported at such a time) is desirable, that would give us time to clean everything up and maybe the friendly ppc arch team can help us fix nant as well so ppc users can get a complete mono stack.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]