[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debian GNUstep maintainers] Next GNUstep problem BioCocoa.app (Was: RFS: adun.app (updated package))

Andreas Tille wrote:
> Yes.  I guessed that all this stuff is not trivial [...]

Like Hubert said, it can be entirely trivial or it may be hell.

> Well, I personally will spent my time with problems I see chances
> to be able to add real value.

That's a sane strategy.  I looked more carefully at upstream's page
today, and figured out the following:

BioCocoa is a framework, i.e. a shared library in GNUstep's parlance.
It is intended to be used by applications, like these:
The trunk builds (cd to the GNUstep dir first and do gs_make), but the
result is, not very surprising, a library.  Maybe BioCocoa.app is not
yet adopted to the new API.

1.7 looks like a mess to me.  I don't think that everything is in
place.  There is another library, SXML, against which the app should
be linked.  This library is installed in binary form (ugh!) in the svn

The current Debian package contains only an app, which is more or less
a proof of concept.  If it is useful as a conversion tool between all
those (entirely unknown to me) formats, I guess it would be OK to
maintain it as long as it is not buggy.

Either way, the prospective maintainer has to contact upstream to ask
them what their plans are.

> Ahh, you mean also 1.7 is not buildable?

Yes; a slight correction: 2.0 is buildable, 1.7 is not.

> Would you mind sending a qualified bug report against the relevant
> package to keep a record of this problem.

That's #463416, I hope that Hubert will upload a fixed package soon.
(As a side note -- I tried your suggestion to delete the nameserver
database and it worked, but according to upstream that was very wrong
for reasons I had not anticipated.)

Reply to: