On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 22:55:00 +0200 Alin Nastac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > On Friday 10 November 2006 16:28, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 08:56 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: > >> > >>> Ok, the list definitely isn't accurate. If there is a legitimate > >>> reason to mask sylpheed-claws-1.x you also have to mask it's > >>> reverse deps. However I'm still waiting for the explanation why > >>> it is on that list. (I don't mind if it's masked for a good > >>> reason, but I need to know that reason). > >>> > >> There is no immediate reason, of course. However, gtk+-1 and > >> glib-1 will be removed as soon after the big cleanup as is > >> feasible, and sylpheed-clasws-1.x is a gtk+-1 app, and therefore > >> must go as well. I didn't generate the list, but my understanding > >> was that it was intended to include all packages with a hard dep > >> on gtk+-1, in addition to gnome 1.x. > >> > > > > Gtk1 actually is broken for --as-needed. It's linking is broken > > thanks to a libtool which refuses to link against a non-installed > > libgdk. > > > > > I think gtk+-1.2.10-r12 solved this problem. > > Hope you guys aren't seriously considering dropping gtk+1. As long as > we have packages that depend on it (packages that has nothing to do > with gnome herd/team), gtk+1 should stay in the tree. To stop people guessing around, I had a chat with compnerd on irc where he explained that sc-1.x was on the list because it already had a gtk2 successor so would be "safe" to remove, and that there wouldn't be any problem with keeping it if I wanted that. (But as I already considered removing it myself for a while I agreed that it's ok to go if it's done properly). Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
