[gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[John N. Laliberte]

Hello all,

The GNOME herd is now ready for 2.12.0 to be tested.

The gnome-2.12.0.ebuild should hit the mirrors shortly. ( just committed)

Please see this document for information on how to test:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~allanonjl/gnome/2.12.0/testing.instructions.txt

Thanks, and happy bug hunting!
John N. Laliberte ( AllanonJL )
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1015 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 03:29 +0000, John N. Laliberte wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> The GNOME herd is now ready for 2.12.0 to be tested.
> 
> The gnome-2.12.0.ebuild should hit the mirrors shortly. ( just committed)
> 
> Please see this document for information on how to test:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~allanonjl/gnome/2.12.0/testing.instructions.txt
> 

Hmm, I still have these as outdated:

? app-text/gnome-doc-utils/gnome-doc-utils-0.4.0.ebuild
? dev-cpp/gconfmm/gconfmm-2.12.0.ebuild
? dev-cpp/gnome-vfsmm/gnome-vfsmm-2.12.0.ebuild
? dev-cpp/libglademm/libglademm-2.6.1.ebuild
? dev-cpp/libgnomecanvasmm/libgnomecanvasmm-2.12.0.ebuild
? dev-cpp/libgnomemm/libgnomemm-2.12.0.ebuild
? dev-cpp/libgnomeuimm/libgnomeuimm-2.12.0.ebuild
? dev-libs/libxml2/libxml2-2.6.22.ebuild
? gnome-base/libgnome/libgnome-2.12.0.ebuild
? gnome-base/orbit/orbit-2.13.1.ebuild
? gnome-extra/gucharmap/gucharmap-1.4.4.ebuild
? sys-apps/dbus/dbus-0.50.ebuild

Or am I too quick ? :D


-- 
Martin Schlemmer


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[Phil Richards]

On 2005-09-14, John N. Laliberte <allanonjl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>  The GNOME herd is now ready for 2.12.0 to be tested.
>  The gnome-2.12.0.ebuild should hit the mirrors shortly. ( just committed)
>  Please see this document for information on how to test:
>  http://dev.gentoo.org/~allanonjl/gnome/2.12.0/testing.instructions.txt

I might be being stupid, but having suitably unmasked what was suggested
I get:

| ~ # emerge -puv --newuse gnome
| 
| These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
| 
| Calculating dependencies \
| !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "sys-apps/pmount" have been masked.
| !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
| - sys-apps/pmount-0.9.3-r3 (masked by: package.mask)
| # Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> (7 Sep 2005)
| # Remasking because the Gnome herd is too lazy to look
| # into bugs that are over 4 months old with regards to
| # hal and dbus. Patches provided and everything.
| # When I volunteered to fix it and handle any issues..
| # I received the stock "wait for foser" response.
|
| For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or
| section 2.2 "Software Availability" in the Gentoo Handbook.
| !!!    (dependency required by "gnome-base/gnome-vfs-2.12.0" [ebuild])

Normally, I would just unmask pmount, but the comment doesn't exactly
fill me with confidence as regards the stability of pmount (and whereas
I am happy for gnome to crash in a heap, I tend to be a little more
cautious around things that work at lower levels in the system)...

Should I just go ahead and unmask, or what if I want to test out gnome
2.12?

phil
-- 
change name before "@" to "phil" for email

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[Aaron Walker]

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

Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> 
> Hmm, I still have these as outdated:
> 
> ? dev-cpp/gconfmm/gconfmm-2.12.0.ebuild
> ? dev-cpp/gnome-vfsmm/gnome-vfsmm-2.12.0.ebuild
> ? dev-cpp/libglademm/libglademm-2.6.1.ebuild
> ? dev-cpp/libgnomecanvasmm/libgnomecanvasmm-2.12.0.ebuild
> ? dev-cpp/libgnomemm/libgnomemm-2.12.0.ebuild
> ? dev-cpp/libgnomeuimm/libgnomeuimm-2.12.0.ebuild

The above haven't been committed yet as I've been really busy lately (or I
should say... I've been spending too much time hacking on herdstat instead of
doing my job ;p).

Hopefully I can finish these up today and tomorrow.

Cheers
- --
"It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milkbone underware."
- -- Norm, from _Cheers_

Aaron Walker <ka0ttic@gentoo.org>
[ BSD | commonbox | cron | cvs-utils | mips | netmon | shell-tools | vim ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDK/95C3poscuANHARAjagAKDaeBbzfIOveeDCY6PKhg6vRumEEQCfRPYq
EfcjpZIiwU3M3P3w6nBqCxY=
=owae
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 819 bytes --]

Phil Richards wrote:
> On 2005-09-14, John N. Laliberte <allanonjl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> Normally, I would just unmask pmount, but the comment doesn't exactly
> fill me with confidence as regards the stability of pmount (and whereas
> I am happy for gnome to crash in a heap, I tend to be a little more
> cautious around things that work at lower levels in the system)...
> 

Actually if you look at the comment you can see that it is dbus and hal
that seem to have the problems. I have used pmount without a problem for
quite a while now. There is one bug open about pmount on bugs.gentoo.org
but for me it looks like a user error.

>
> Should I just go ahead and unmask, or what if I want to test out gnome
> 2.12?

That I leave up to you.

> 
> phil

Regards,
Petteri Räty (Betelgeuse)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing

[Stefan Jones]

Phil Richards wrote:

> | ~ # emerge -puv --newuse gnome
>
>| 
>| These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
>| 
>| Calculating dependencies \
>| !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "sys-apps/pmount" have been masked.
>| !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
>| - sys-apps/pmount-0.9.3-r3 (masked by: package.mask)
>| # Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> (7 Sep 2005)
>| # Remasking because the Gnome herd is too lazy to look
>| # into bugs that are over 4 months old with regards to
>| # hal and dbus. Patches provided and everything.
>| # When I volunteered to fix it and handle any issues..
>| # I received the stock "wait for foser" response.
>  
>

>Normally, I would just unmask pmount, but the comment doesn't exactly
>fill me with confidence as regards the stability of pmount (and whereas
>I am happy for gnome to crash in a heap, I tend to be a little more
>cautious around things that work at lower levels in the system)...
>
>Should I just go ahead and unmask, or what if I want to test out gnome
>2.12?
>  
>

Unmask pmount, it is needed now to get useful hal support where you can 
mount USB drives from nautilus when they are hot plugged. This is 
because with the new hal they have removed the fstab updater.

( or you could just put -hal in your USE flags, but better just 
unmasking it and finding the bugs - I have not found any )

Stefan
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list