Hello:
Richard Hughes wrote on 03/20/2015 11:51 PM:
I've just pushed two new gdk-pixbuf2 builds to rawhide *not* F22.
* The first splits out the modules (e.g. the ico, jpeg, gif loaders)
to a separate subpackage called gdk-pixbuf2-modules -- which we'll
certainly need on workstation but really not on cloud or text-only
installs
* The second splits out the xlib code which hasn't been touched
upstream since about 2008. It's the only thing that drags in half of
Xorg onto the cloud image thanks to the
PackageKit->AppStreamGlib->GdkPixbuf dep chain.
Looking at gdk-pixbuf2-2.31.3-3.fc23, gdk-pixbuf2-xlib-devel
contains pkgconfig files, libgdk_pixbuf_xlib-2.0.so symlink but no headers?
So how can we know what API (functions) needs -lgdk_pixbuf_xlib-2.0
linking when using them?
i.e. Looks like /usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/gdk-pixbuf-xlib/ should also be
moved to gdk-pixbuf2-xlib-devel.
For the first change I'm also going to add the -modules dep to gtk2
and gtk3 so we just do the right thing on upgrades. For the second I
think everything should be okay without any rebuilds, as rpm will be
able to drag on the right subpackage for the
libgdk_pixbuf_xlib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) dep.
The second change has the potential to break the following packages if
they are not using pkgconfig-style deps:
alltray-0:0.71b-8.fc21.x86_64
camorama-0:0.19-14.fc21.x86_64
icewm-0:1.3.8-4.fc21.x86_64
libreoffice-core-1:4.3.2.2-5.fc21.x86_64
sawfish-0:1.11-1.fc21.x86_64
superkb-0:0.22-6.fc21.x86_64
w3m-img-0:0.5.3-18.fc21.x86_64
xscreensaver-base-1:5.32-10.fc21.x86_64
I'm going to go through the list now and make sure everything still builds fine.
Richard.
Regards,
Mamoru
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
