[Bug 168190] Review Request: gpsim - A simulator for Microchip (TM) PIC (TM) microcontrollers
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Oct 5 11:32:32 UTC 2005
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: gpsim - A simulator for Microchip (TM) PIC (TM) microcontrollers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168190
------- Additional Comments From aportal at univ-montp2.fr 2005-10-05 07:32 EST -------
(In reply to comment #16)
> Different option:
>
> Put gtk+extra 2.x into package name "gtk+extra" version 2.x, which will
> upgrade the existing packages for the unofficial 1.1.0 version.
>
> Is gtk+extra 1.x needed by anything?
Not in Fedora at the moment, since that's me that want to introduce it because
it was needed by gpsim (for previous releases).
> Or would it be packaged just for
> fun/completeness?
I just listened Ralf.
> If so, it could be packaged as gtk+extra1 any time.
> Just make sure that it doesn't conflict _if_ it were packaged.
No conflict. Both are currently installed on my box.
> > Should I have to do the same thing with the gpsim spec
> > because 0.21.4 requires the inofficial gtk+extra package?
>
> No. You would build the new gpsim version against your latest
> gtk+extra packages, and it would be seen as an upgrade. Mind you,
> dependencies on the new/different gtk+extra SONAMES are automatic.
OK.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list