Hi, I agree we should support Solaris 10 as much as possible.
For nevada, maybe it might help to pick builds that use even JDS gnome versions. However the JDS gnome build schedule is out of date: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/documents/jds_schedule/ The spec files can look at which dependencies are installed, and choose to build stuff against those dependencies. It should be possible to build it on a number of platforms (whichever s10 and nevada builds you want to choose). I'm running JDS gnome 2.24RC1 compiled on s10u5. Its sort of OK for building KDE4 with, but its not production quality, as I guess there are very few people building it on s10. When I login to JDS, a java process starts and uses 98% cpu. Songbird does not start. Firefox 3.03 seems a little more stable than before, but still crashes on some web pages. I can make sure that KDE4 builds with JDS gnome 2.24 on s10. Which is fairly easy, as almost all the JDS gnome packages are compiled the same way as they are on SXCE. It is really neat that KDE4 is a modern desktop supported by us for solaris 10 users. Thanks, Mark On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 08:21:12 -0400 "Ben Taylor" <bentaylor.solx86 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Lukas Oboril <oboril.lukas at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Adriaan de Groot <groot at kde.org> > > wrote: > >> On Friday 03 October 2008 23:20:12 Adriaan de Groot wrote: > >>> Should be push > >>> more aggressively for updates to the baseline nv (that would mean > >>> I would have to upgrade more than once a year, too). > >> > >> That was meant to be "Should *we* push ..". Basically, is our > >> selection of acceptable nv versions still ok? Are we finding > >> problems due to trying to support all three of S10 and nv70 and > >> nv98? > > > > > > I think, my opinion .... we should support S10 as much as possible. > > That's clear. > > > > Nevada ... I'm not sure ... I think that we should be on the edge... > > take care about a few last builds. I think that 97 is fine. I would > > like to jump over just a few builds, i.e next build on my laptop > > should be 100 and then probably 104 (which plained for Xserver > > 1.5.1). Build like nv70 are very obsolete these days and minimal > > users have those builds. Another thing is pretty high double effort > > in packaging for Nevada. Many dependencies are in Nevada > > integrated. I know some of those are not in our configuration, but > > some of those are usefull. > > Let me just say that I am concerned that feature functionality > between S10 and SXCE could be a little troublesome. Having done some > work on gstreamer and gst-plugins-* on S10 with dependencies, and > then realizing that the equivilent gst-plugins on SXCE don't have the > same set of dependencies (libavc1394, libraw1394, etc). > > I know that we're trying to use the dependencies in SXCE, but I'm > wondering how much we will chase our tails by not using the same set > of dependencies? However, I realize that trying to do so starts > tilting towards a build environment, and I'm trying really hard not > to start that discussion again. > > Ben > _______________________________________________ > kde-discuss mailing list > kde-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-discuss --
