Guys,

We have run into several new build failures with trinity related to a glib
header inclusion change in the last update or two. The trinity package are a
relatively simple fix changing the header inclusions from '#include
<glib/whatever.h>' to '#include <glib.h>'.

However, some of the build failures experienced are not trinity build
failures, but do to other OS packages. Example, koffice fails with:

In file included from /usr/include/wv2/olestream.h:26:0,
from graphicshandler.cpp:23:
/usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/giochannel.h:28:2: error: #error "Only <glib.h> can
be included directly."

My question is this "When I run across these, do you want me to open a bug,
just drop a note to the maintainer, or drop a note to the list?"

Fixes are easy enough, but before I start rebuilding everything from ABS, I
want to make sure this info gets to the right place.

What say the devs?


--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

2012/6/22 David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com>:
> Guys,
>
> *We have run into several new build failures with trinity related to a glib
> header inclusion change in the last update or two. The trinity package are a
> relatively simple fix changing the header inclusions from '#include
> <glib/whatever.h>' to '#include <glib.h>'.
>
> *However, some of the build failures experienced are not trinity build
> failures, but do to other OS packages. Example, koffice fails with:
>
> In file included from /usr/include/wv2/olestream.h:26:0,
> * * * * * * * * from graphicshandler.cpp:23:
> /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/giochannel.h:28:2: error: #error "Only <glib.h> can
> be included directly."
>
> *My question is this "When I run across these, do you want me to open a bug,
> just drop a note to the maintainer, or drop a note to the list?"
>
> *Fixes are easy enough, but before I start rebuilding everything from ABS, I
> want to make sure this info gets to the right place.
>
> *What say the devs?
>
>
> --
> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
>

Similar to https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/29643 ?

Rafael

On 06/22/2012 02:56 PM, rafael ff1 wrote:
> Similar to https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/29643 ?
>
> Rafael
>

Precisely similar. OK, so we will drop the bug and fix for those we find. Thanks.

--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/22/2012 03:33 PM, Laurent Carlier wrote:
> It's an upstream bug.

Thanks, I guess the upstream guys can handle the differing behavior with
preprocessor conditionals without adversely affecting anyone.

- --
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk/n5uEACgkQZMpuZ8Cyrch1uACeLrJB1M/a8yCYxf6ca4Y9i4d3
YF8An0C9VhxAhOGCnHxAL+Jjq+4qUJlh
=drlJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----