FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-07-2007, 06:51 AM
Eric Belanger
 
Default glib2 status

Hi,

Currently, on x86_64, glib2 is in the core repo and is at version
2.14.4-1. However, on i686, we have glib2 2.14.2-2 in extra and glib2 2.14.3-1 in
testing.

Does anyone know why the core move hasn't been done on i686 yet?
I believe it had enough sign-offs. Is it an oversight?

Also, why the glib2 in x86_64 core is more up-to-date than the i686
testing one? There was no sign-off thread for glib2 2.14.4-1. Is it more
up-to-date on x86_64 because gtk2 and associated packages are more up-to-date on x86_64?


Eric

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 12-07-2007, 07:27 AM
"Jan de Groot"
 
Default glib2 status

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: arch-dev-public-bounces@archlinux.org [mailto:arch-dev-public-
> bounces@archlinux.org] Namens Eric Belanger
> Verzonden: vrijdag 7 december 2007 8:52
> Aan: arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
> Onderwerp: [arch-dev-public] glib2 status
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Currently, on x86_64, glib2 is in the core repo and is at version
> 2.14.4-1. However, on i686, we have glib2 2.14.2-2 in extra and glib2
> 2.14.3-1 in
> testing.
>
> Does anyone know why the core move hasn't been done on i686 yet?
> I believe it had enough sign-offs. Is it an oversight?
>
> Also, why the glib2 in x86_64 core is more up-to-date than the i686
> testing one? There was no sign-off thread for glib2 2.14.4-1. Is it
> more
> up-to-date on x86_64 because gtk2 and associated packages are more up-
> to-date on x86_64?

I didn't update i686 yet for the package updates I did last weekend.
Eventually, glib2 has to be removed from both testing and extra and should
be added to core for i686. I updated to core on x86_64 as I wanted the gtk2
package to depend on the latest version and have the move done from extra to
core. I didn't ask for signoff for this one for a reason though: by the time
we have it signed off and I have moved it into core there's a new version
already. Besides, glib2 is not a critical core package, because it's a
makedepend for syslog-ng only. Syslog-ng doesn't change because of a glib2
upgrade, as it is compiled static. I did some runtime tests with the new
glib2 and gtk2 packages and all worked fine.

I'll see what I can do with the i686 packages this weekend, hope to shorten
the difflist.


_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 12-07-2007, 05:08 PM
"Travis Willard"
 
Default glib2 status

On Dec 7, 2007 3:27 AM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
> I didn't ask for signoff for this one for a reason though: by the time
> we have it signed off and I have moved it into core there's a new version
> already.

OK, but we've made it policy that ANY core package at ANY time
requires signoffs. You can't just decide to circumvent this on a whim
because it'd be inconvenient for you - at the very least bring it up
on the ML first for discussion. This policy is there for a reason.

> Besides, glib2 is not a critical core package

Every core package is a critical core package. That's the whole POINT of core.

--
Travis

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:45 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org