Re: How up to date is this?
Idar Tollefsen wrote:
> Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>
> Thank you for your reply. It cleared up a lot of things for me, and I'm
> left with a better feeling of how the package and distribution cycle work
> for the different versions of Debian.
>
> >> Where is gdk-pixbuf? I have installed all thinkable
> >> imlib, gtk and gnome development packages from the
> >> frozen Potato, but gdk-pixbuf is nowhere to be seen.
> >> I finally went out and got it from ftp.gnome.org
> >> and compiled and installed it myself.
>
> >IIRC, this is going to be part of GNOME 1.2, which is currently at
> >1.1.90, i.e.not quite stable.
>
> It's true that gdk-pixbuf was to be found only in the "unstable" branch
> of the GNOME source tree, but there was a directory for it in the "stable"
> branch refering to the unstable versions.
>
> However, I do see your point. It's not stable so it has no place
> in Potato. On the other hand, who ever compiled Dia had to have
> it installed. And shouldn't the users have the possibilty to install
> all development packages needed to compile the other Debian packages?
> It's a little like "No, this development package is not stable so we
> won't include it in this stable realse. But hey, here go right ahead and
> get this stable package I compiled with it." I almost feel that any package
> requering gdk-pixbuf should also have been taken out of Potato if it's
> so unsafe to trust users with it in a stable version.
>
> That didn't come out quite right, but I hope you understand what I mean.
> If they can deliver programs for the stable version that requires
> gdk-pixbuf to compile, what reasons do they have for saying gdk-pibuf
> itself isn't stable enough to be included?
I just did "apt-get source --build dia" and it worked, configure checked for imlib
and not for gdk-pixbuf, so the latter is *not* needed for the version of dia which
ships with potato.
Maybe that's why 0.83 is the potato version, because newer ones require
gdk-pixbuf. In any case, you have all you need to build the shipping version.
For newer stuff, I'm afraid you'll have to wait for the woody packages.
> > The libart-dev package has all of the header files, static libs, .so symlink,
> > etc. In general, if you have a lib but can't build something that depends on
> > it, get the lib's -dev package.
>
> I did. I installed libart-dev, but that doesn't install libart.h, which
> I'm quite sure is supposed to be part of that exact pacakge. I even removed
> it and reinstalled it to make sure no mistakes or errors had crept into
> the installation of it.
Look at that, you're right, libart.h is not in any of the debian/*.files files in
the gnome-libs source package.
I would guess this file is new to the 1.2 GNOME release... ?
In any case, once again, it is not required to build dia 0.83.
Hope this helps,
-Adam P.
Reply to: