On Sat, 2012-10-27 at 06:45 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > It causes problems for people who build things outside of chroots with
> > straight rpmbuild, though, if they need to ever build different things
> > with different buildreqs (even as test builds).
> >
> > Admitted
Bill Nottingham wrote:
> It causes problems for people who build things outside of chroots with
> straight rpmbuild, though, if they need to ever build different things
> with different buildreqs (even as test builds).
>
> Admittedly, we like to encourage people to use mock, but people will still
On Thu, 2012-10-25 at 09:55 +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> Anyway, I think that neither of those solutions is far superior in any way.
> Maybe I could drop all the renaming in the compat package and make it conflict
> with guile-devel, but that there seems to be no agreement on whether it is or
> is
On 10/23/2012 12:52 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 12:12 PM, Jan Synacek wrote:
>> This is what I had originally in mind. After trying to realize this idea and
>> consulting it with the maintainer (I'm a comaintainer of guile), it didn't
>> seem
>> right. The problem is that a lot of thin
On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 17:13 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
> > Well, I don't mind doing that, but I'd like to be sure there's a broad
> > consensus that this is the way to go first. I don't think 'duelling
> > drafts' is the best way to decide on what d
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said:
> Well, I don't mind doing that, but I'd like to be sure there's a broad
> consensus that this is the way to go first. I don't think 'duelling
> drafts' is the best way to decide on what direction to go; I'd rather
> make sure we agree on the direction f
On 10/23/2012 03:44 PM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:52:47PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> Parallel installable guile interpreters:
>> http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-1.8/filelist
>> http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-2.0/filelist
>
> So both new and old g
On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 16:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:58:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 12:17 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >
> > > """
> > > Compat Package Conflicts
> > > It is acceptable to use Conflicts: in some cases involving c
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:58:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 12:17 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
> > """
> > Compat Package Conflicts
> > It is acceptable to use Conflicts: in some cases involving compat packages.
> > These are the cases where it is not feasible to pa
On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 12:17 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> """
> Compat Package Conflicts
> It is acceptable to use Conflicts: in some cases involving compat packages.
> These are the cases where it is not feasible to patch applications to look
> in alternate locations for the -compat files, so t
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:44:11PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:52:47PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> > Parallel installable guile interpreters:
> > http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-1.8/filelist
> > http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-2.0/filelist
>
>
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:52:47PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote:
> Parallel installable guile interpreters:
> http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-1.8/filelist
> http://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/guile-2.0/filelist
So both new and old guile scripts need to be patched to call
the right binary
On 10/23/2012 12:12 PM, Jan Synacek wrote:
> This is what I had originally in mind. After trying to realize this idea and
> consulting it with the maintainer (I'm a comaintainer of guile), it didn't
> seem
> right. The problem is that a lot of things have to be renamed, including some
> autotools
On 10/23/2012 11:55 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> I agree, updating 21 packages is a bit too much at this point in F18
> schedule.
>
> However, a way to make this work for F18 would be creating a parallel
> installable guile20 package. So instead of what you are planning now:
>
> guile-2.0.x
> compat
On 10/23/2012 11:42 AM, Jan Synacek wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 11:15 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
>> On 10/23/2012 08:51 AM, Jan Synacek wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I've created a review request for compat-guile1.8:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
>>>
>>> Once the compat package lan
On 10/23/2012 11:15 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 08:51 AM, Jan Synacek wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I've created a review request for compat-guile1.8:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
>>
>> Once the compat package lands in rawhide, I will leave some time for the
>> tra
On 10/23/2012 08:51 AM, Jan Synacek wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've created a review request for compat-guile1.8:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
>
> Once the compat package lands in rawhide, I will leave some time for the
> transition (I may work on the required patches if time
Hello all,
I've created a review request for compat-guile1.8:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868263
Once the compat package lands in rawhide, I will leave some time for the
transition (I may work on the required patches if time allows me). After that,
guile (now version 1.8) will bec
18 matches
Mail list logo
