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

Re: RFS : mldonkey 2.5.27-2



On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 07:54:43AM +0200, sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 06:19:04AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 01:43:04AM +0200, Sylvain LE GALL wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I know i am after the ocaml mini freeze but i come to pray some of you
> > > to upload mldonkey ( last one, i promise ).
> > 
> > Mmm. Technically, we have until the 17th of august to upload priority low
> > packages, a bit more for priority medium packages like those we upload.
> > 
> 
> Ok, so i have still times.

Yes, altough it would be nice if we were ready when the whole of libtiff4 goes
in, presumably on august 15.

> > > 2.5.27-1 generate an empty GUI ( link a program with nothing in it ).
> > > 
> > > 2.5.27-2 generate a good GUI but with a bad build depends ( on
> > > libtgk-dev ). But it is the more fast and clean solution i have found. I
> > > will submit a patch to upstream and generate a deb ASAP, but it won't be
> > > for the ocaml freeze.
> > 
> > Whyever is there a dependency on gtk 1.2, if we use lablgtk2 ? I don't fully
> > understand this, but i would much prefer this to be fixed before i upload,
> > since there could be a conflict between the two -dev environments.
> > 
> 
> Well, the configure.in is broken and test for gtk-config programs (
> which belongs to libgtk1.2-dev ) before building the GUI. I don't think
> there is any conflicts between the two dev env but i also prefers to fix
> this before uploading.

updating it to use the gtk2 and pkg-config way should not be outlandish
though.

> > > As now, i cannot commit in svn ( seems there is problem ). I attach the
> > > patch to the latest SVN.
> > 
> > If that happens, you go to #alioth on irc.oftc.org, and ask for a fixup.
> > 
> 
> I have asked yesterday but it as 2 hours and i think that no body hear
> me. 

I asked again, let's see what happens now.

Friendly,

Sven Luther



Reply to: