Re: planning for GNOPPIX 0.6
On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 06:42, Sven Herzberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> first of all I want to say thank you to all the maintainers of
> Debian/GNOME packages. You really make my desktop what it is.
>
> I am the maintainer of the GNOPPIX project (which is a linux live cd
> based upon Debian/GNU Linux 3.0). We made a release last weekend and we
> would be happy if it was possible to have a GNOME 2.4 backport for Woody
> within 2 weeks.
>
I am the maintainer of the gnome2.2 backport for woody
(http://www.gnome.org/start/2.2/). I have been following the threads on
this list regarding gnome 2.4 and debian, and am concerned with the
xfree86 4.3 requirement. xfree86 4.3 requires freetype 2.1, which
breaks packages on woody (however, recompiling pango against freetype
2.1 should fix all gnome2 packages). The primary goal of my backport is
to not break woody. As such, if xfree86 4.3 is required, I will not be
backporting gnome2.4 to woody. Once sarge is released (which has
freetype 2.1 integrated), I may backport gnome 2.4 to sarge.
> I think that it's important to have 2.4 packages for sid first, so
> please upload 2.4 packages into experimental. Please don't misunderstand
> me, if somebody doesn't have time for this, then please contact me and
> tell me how I can help you.
>
I agree. One of the goals of my backport is to be able to 'apt-get
dist-upgrade' to sid, as well as having my packages come from Official
debian. If the packages aren't in sid, then they aren't in my backport
(with a few exceptions).
> GNOME 2.4 is really being waited for by lots of people and I think
> that a GNOPPIX disk is a great way to demonstarte GNOME 2.4.
I would really like to use gnome 2.4 myself, but unless the xfree86 4.3
requirement (and by extension freetype) can be lowered, I don't see how
to mix woody and gnome2.4.
All this said, I am open to suggestions. It is not clear to me what in
gnome2.4 actually requires xfree86 4.3. If it was just the resolution
switching application and fontilus, then just leaving those out could be
the answer. But if I have to leave out all or most of the applications
that makes gnome2.4 different from gnome2.2, then it probably wouldn't
be worth it.
Jamie
--
Email: jstrand1@rochester.rr.com
GPG/PGP ID: 26384A3A
Fingerprint: D9FF DF4A 2D46 A353 A289 E8F5 AA75 DCBE 2638 4A3A
Reply to: