Re: using freedesktop.org libs
Michel,
As happy as I'd be for people to start using the FD.o libraries,
there are a couple things left to do before I'd recommend doing
this.
o the X locales stuff is broken, and needs fixing. This
means one more library needs to be autofoo'ed and tested.
o we need to vet the patches since 4.3 in the libraries.
Keith Packard and I discovered some patches applied since 4.3 shipped
that had clearly not been even trivially tested. Needless to
say, we weren't at all happy to discover this, but as a result
we lack confidence in the bits until we've gone through all the
files looking at each patch since 4.3 shipped. Sigh...
This is why we haven't started "releasing" tarballs yet,
and the bits are just in CVS.
So I'd hold off a few weeks, until this gets done.
Help in getting these things done would be greatly appreciated,
by anyone interested... Interested?
- Jim Gettys
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 09:46, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 13:11, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> > > > > I found this idea very interesting. I think that the debian project should
> > > > > take more advantage of the freedesktop.org libs.
> > > >
> > > > Glancing briefly at the packages in sid, we've been using the ones
> > > > they have released for a while. Unreleased libraries do not belong in
> > > > unstable.
> > >
> > > It's not about released vs. unreleased but XFree86 vs. freedesktop.org.
>
> Actually, I misread your paragraph above and drew the wrong conclusions.
> Sorry about that.
>
> I agree that unreleased libraries aren't for sid, but maybe for
> experimental? :)
>
>
> --
> Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer
> Software libre enthusiast | http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
--
Jim Gettys <Jim.Gettys@hp.com>
HP Labs, Cambridge Research Laboratory
Reply to: