Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:28:41PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 02:14:49AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > I'm not saying this would be immoral or something like that, but e.g. a
> > major release without Evolution [2] (currently ages away from reentering
> > testing) might make Debian stable unusable for many users - and you should
> > be aware of such consequences.
>
> I don't use evolution, so I really haven't concerned myself with this at
> all. Some people that I work with do use it, though, so if there is
> something bite-sized that I can do to help it along, I would probably do it.
> However, evolution has no RC bugs, and is only waiting on dependencies.
> It looks like GNOME 2 in general needs either more time or more hinting.
... which will happen in a couple of days. However, evolution currently
depends on three "trouble spots" in addition to the guts of GNOME 2.4:
* krb4 - has a complicated dependency graph involving heimdal and
postgresql, but with any luck this should disappear once perl is
ready.
* pilot-link - needs perl, but also its soname has changed between
testing and unstable so it'll doubtless need more attention.
* mozilla - almost there but hasn't built on m68k and mipsel,
apparently due to various dependency problems. Could benefit from
being retried.
Those interested in evolution would do well to investigate those
problems.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: