[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 David Nielsen <gnomeuser gmail com>:
>
>
> 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.
>
In the meantime, if MonoDevelop 1.0 is not buildable, perhaps we
should revert to 0.19 (IIRC that's the last buildable version). Paul,
thougts?


-- 
Michel Salim
http://hircus.jaiku.com/


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