[CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS 5.x RPM package from it? [1] http://krita.org/ -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On 05/01/2012 06:52 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz > package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is > created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS > 5.x RPM package from it? > > [1] http://krita.org/ > I would be happy to maintain a CentOS-5 RPM and put it in the CentOS Extras repository. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On 05/01/2012 06:52 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz > package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is > created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS > 5.x RPM package from it? > > [1] http://krita.org/ The requirements include: qt 4.6.0 or newer == CentOS-5 has qt4 version "4.2.1-1.el5_7.1" ... are you sure it will work? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 17:14, Johnny Hughes wrote: > I would be happy to maintain a CentOS-5 RPM and put it in the CentOS > Extras repository. > > Thank you Johnny! I will inform the Krita list now. Do you give your permission that I may pass your email address on to the person building the tarball? > The requirements include: > > qt 4.6.0 or newer > > == > > CentOS-5 has qt4 version "4.2.1-1.el5_7.1" ... are you sure it will work? > The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball and linking against that. He is building it now. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball > and linking against that. He is building it now. erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are you sure this is a good idea ? - KB -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh ICQ: 2522219| Yahoo IM: z00dax | Gtalk: z00dax GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:14, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: >> The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball >> and linking against that. He is building it now. > > erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for > either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib > associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are > you sure this is a good idea ? > I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, such as AutoDesk support. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:14, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: >>> The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball >>> and linking against that. He is building it now. >> >> erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for >> either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib >> associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are >> you sure this is a good idea ? > > I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I > advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely > distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, > such as AutoDesk support. I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, noting that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should only have bug and security fixes? mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:53, wrote: > I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the > std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to > recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. > > A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, noting > that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should only have > bug and security fixes? > I am not sure what the newer Qt provides, but I know that many KDE technologies rely on the latest-greatest Qt at the time of the KDE release. Your knowledge and participation in the thread would be most valuable, especially in this early stage: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.krita/5503 Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:53, wrote: >> I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the >> std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to >> recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. >> >> A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, >> noting that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should only have >> bug and security fixes? > > I am not sure what the newer Qt provides, but I know that many KDE > technologies rely on the latest-greatest Qt at the time of the KDE > release. Your knowledge and participation in the thread would be most > valuable, especially in this early stage: > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.krita/5503 a) You do understand what I'm saying about subreleases vs. release? That there shouldn't be anything that new (as opposed to, say, python 10-12 years ago, where each subrelease broke everything)? I would strongly urge you to pass that question to the krista list. b) I'd love to do some programming again, but a day job and a life outside work (see (c)), I don't have time, and c) I most certainly will *NOT* be on the list next week, as I'm getting remarried Sat mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 20:17, wrote: > a) You do understand what I'm saying about subreleases vs. release? That > there shouldn't be anything that new (as opposed to, say, python 10-12 > years ago, where each subrelease broke everything)? I would strongly urge > you to pass that question to the krista list. Yes, I understand. He is building against Qt 4.8 or thereabout, whereas CentOS 5.8 ships with Qt 3.x. I see these Qt 4.7 packages, but it is not clear to me that using them is what you are suggesting: http://joseph.freivald.com/linux/2011/09/23/qt-4-7-4-and-qt-creator-2-3-0-for-centosrhel-5/ > b) I'd love to do some programming again, but a day job and a life outside > work (see (c)), I don't have time, and > c) I most certainly will *NOT* be on the list next week, as I'm getting > remarried Sat > Congratulations! I hope that your new marriage turns out better than the first one. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
wrote: >>> erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for >>> either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib >>> associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are >>> you sure this is a good idea ? >> >> I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I >> advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely >> distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, >> such as AutoDesk support. > > I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the > std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to > recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. Nothing in el5 depends on the qt4-4.2.x that ships with el5. It's an old, rotten, and completely pointless package. Nothing of any interest could be build with it for years now, probably never ever was it of any use to anyone. I replaced it with a rebuild of qt4-4.6.2-20 from el6. This gives me a common and useable base for both el5 and el6. That could be a sensible approach for a krita.el5 package, too. -Michael ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Maintainer for Krita on CentOS
On 05/14/2012 04:14 PM, Michael Lampe wrote: > wrote: > erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are you sure this is a good idea ? >>> I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I >>> advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely >>> distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, >>> such as AutoDesk support. >> I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the >> std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to >> recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. > Nothing in el5 depends on the qt4-4.2.x that ships with el5. It's an > old, rotten, and completely pointless package. Nothing of any interest > could be build with it for years now, probably never ever was it of any > use to anyone. > > I replaced it with a rebuild of qt4-4.6.2-20 from el6. This gives me a > common and useable base for both el5 and el6. > > That could be a sensible approach for a krita.el5 package, too. > I would certainly build and put that package into centosplus for el5 .. it would give us the ability build several el6 packages for el5 too ... if Kitra will work with that, then this might be able to move forward. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
