[Fedora-packaging] Re: Rawhide's Mono stack

Paul paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk
Mon Feb 9 22:18:48 UTC 2009


> The current Mono stack in post-alpha Rawhide is rather broken -- as of
> today, on my machine (x86_64) none of these packages work:
> - - monodevelop
> - - banshee
> - - tomboy
> - - f-spot

I know the last 3 need a rebuild as they're built using mono-addins-0.3.
What problems are you seeing with MD? It's working happily here.

> It seems that the entire stack of libraries need to be recompiled --
> gtk-sharp2, etc., and as such we should probably coordinate the
> rebuilding process. If B depends on A, does a rebuild of A affect B with
> Mono packages? Not so sure about this; if not, it makes life easier.

It depends (sorry). Mono itself doesn't typically need anything for a
rebuild. However, if something is built against mono-tools or
mono-addins (such as MD and f-spot), then these will break. I've not
noticed anything big break with gtk-sharp2 or gnome-sharp.

AFAIK, the only one with a really nasty circular dependency problem is
nant with mono-cecil-flowanalysis. The move to the 2.4 pre-releases
should not be causing any significant problems.

> If there are dependencies, then one way I could suggest is that we all
> commit updated specs, and then someone (Paul?) could do a chain build of
> all the packages.

I'm fine for that :-)

> Another item: as I proposed in -devel recently, we could probably get
> more Infrastructure support.
> - - our own disttag, similar to the one for the gcc44 test rebuilds earlier
> - - that would probably require our own mailing list, to coordinate
> matters like this

This would make a lot of sense and would also make the version numbering
a hell of a lot simpler


Sie können mich aufreizen und wirklich heiß machen!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20090209/36056111/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list