Re: ANNOUNCE: xfce4-terminal 1.1.1 released
Gah, sorry about that, I didn't even think of the fact that distros would need the newer 4.19 dev-tools package for packaging.
CC'd Alex; Alex, for some more context (some of it got snipped): we've started depending on some macros I added to xfce4-dev-tools in the 4.19.x series (the XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE stuff), but in stable versions of things (xfce4-terminal, xfce4-notifyd). Turns out that's making things difficult for packagers.
So I think we have two good options:
1) We can put the new m4 macros in a .m4 file, prefix them with something else so they don't conflict, and copy it into each project that uses them and wants to do stable releases for now. Then those modules can run against xfce4-dev-tools 4.18 again.
2) We can backport the new macros to the 4.18 branch of xfce4-dev-tools. Since they're just additions, I don't think there's much risk of problems.
Ok ok, there's also 3) go back to manually listing out the dependencies in each configure.ac and gating X11/Wayland support on them. But I don't feel like doing that ;)
Gaël, Alex, what do you think? Feel free to CC anyone else who should weigh in. Personally I think #2 is the easiest, especially as more non-core modules want to support Wayland and need compile-time support for it, but not sure putting new macros in the stable series of xfce4-dev-tools is ok to do.
-brian
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023, at 15:11, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Sun, 2023-10-15 at 21:08 +0000, Gaël Bonithon wrote:
>> > We have the same issue for xfce4-notifyd but then I assumed 0.9 was the
>> > development branch leading to a 0.10 release for Xfce 4.20. So we pushed
>> > it to
>> > experimental without too much fuss.
>>
>> Xfce4-notifyd 0.9.x are not dev versions as far as I know.
>
> Well that doesn't change the fact that we can't upload it to unstable now :)
>>
>> > Well, if you have it and it's sensible, yes sure.
>>
>> See the attached patch. Not all XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE features are
>> reproduced, but it should be enough. And since it has a limited impact, it
>> should continue to apply until Xfce 4.20.
>
> Thanks, I'll try that and report back (also, no need to encrypt direct mail,
> since it's sent in cleartext to a mailing list anyway).
>
> Regards,
> - --
> Yves-Alexis
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAmUsY4cACgkQ3rYcyPpX
> RFsCbgf8DZyS9lodlomYD9TmhfdHO+cEJ0t/kyza1kEiCfAvZY8EKyKPgbT1Uqch
> Sw5C9KM4Cx2wwIK7rH4FxaG+cdu1XzWy7kwRfWiy7Z5MtXGHKRK3SVgfTkh86pEE
> ht1RTid6An2QhaFTWEjhjH+FB/KKB+hERiVE7tAtoBHeR2Dv5GLI+48DcAnFkWQN
> n10uShfl6vMWdDQF3vJKvX6SEAGZY/+W+mZ1WoliqLfMUoZeMHUmQ6sA0QRHpuW5
> tqOoSG2BAUY5gZ4qMq4o3+4viWOs3y4VjTnZktrOWxjP5b5O95loe1fsbd6WCcS0
> LR+IVnv6GWxO6BfM823a2TEw8o2ang==
> =QZ8z
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: