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

Re: Tcl 8.6 (was Re: Ready for new RPM version?)



Michel Salim wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam redhat com> wrote:
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 05:26 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
You can probably do something very similar with a different tag in Koji.
  That's how Python 2.6 was introduced in rawhide. Fedora maintainers
should be using this feature in this build system more often. Openssl
hassles could have been avoided by using it as well for example.
So can we get Tcl/Tk 8.6 into F11 even if it's late? :-)
Could be depending on how disruptive it is.
It doesn't seem to have been a big issue for MDV. Most of the trouble I
had was in converting things to the new (for MDV) Tcl packaging policy I
implemented at the same time - which is basically the Fedora policy,
because I liked the look of it.

In terms of pure 8.5 -> 8.6 issues, there weren't many, 99% of them
really being just one issue (the use of interp->result is now disallowed
by default, and quite a lot of Tcl code uses this, even though it's been
officially deprecated and not recommended for like a decade). It's
generally very easy for a coder to fix (so not always for me :>), I
upstreamed fixes in quite a few apps, for apps which are dead upstream
but in MDV you can pull my patches from MDV SVN, and in the worst case,
you can allow its use by adding a #define at the top of the source file
concerned (I had to do this in a few packages where I couldn't grok the
'right' way to fix the code).

So I would say it would be possible. Whether it's desirable for Fedora,
I don't really know. It may not be a good idea to do it this late, for a
release which is already pretty stuffed with features. Who's the Tcl/Tk
maintainer?

Me.
Oh, worth noting that probably the biggest Tcl-using app is amsn. You
can patch amsn 0.97.2 to more or less work with 8.6, but it still had a
few issues. In the end I just bumped MDV to current SVN amsn instead, on
the recommendation of upstream, which has rather a lot of nice new
features anyway.

Speaking of Tcl/Tk, does anyone know whether Tcl 8.6 is backward
compatible with 8.5? From my experience, 8.5 *appears* to be backward
compatible with 8.4: a graphics library for this Scheme dialect I use,
Chez, comes as a binary compiled against Tk 8.4, and symlinking gets
it to run just fine.

You are joking right? Tcl 8.5 and 8.4 have a lot of differences. The worst of them is #483836 which can be hardly fixed. Tcl has released 8.6b1 which won't be in F-11 for sure. I'm waiting for stable release. The list of dependencies could be found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tcl8.5. Details about tcl versions could be found here: http://www.tcl.tk/software/tcltk/choose.html
If 8.4 apps run fine on 8.5 and 8.6, perhaps we could add the
necessary symlinks.

Thanks,


Regards,
--
Marcela Mašláňová
BaseOS team Brno


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