Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 195435
update to 0.3.1.6beta1
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:35 EST
Description of problem: 0.3.1.6beta1 is required for Thunar I am currently packaging. It also seems to add a lot of functionalities. I have done the attached spec file patch for the new exo version. In my opinion it should be updated in devel, and maybe in FC5, at least if we want Thunar to land in FC5 soon. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
Created attachment 130957 [details] patch for the spec file for 0.3.1.6beta1
I am a bit learly of updaing exo to a beta1 version, shipping things that the developers aren't even called a RC yet is kinda scary. Take a look at all the xubuntu problem reports that pop up on the Xfce lists (xubuntu shipped Xfce 4.4beta1 + their patches). On the plus side, exo only has one thing that depends on it (Terminal), and also the current exo doesn't build right under devel, so updating exo and Terminal might be ok. I will do some testing and see how stable new exo/Terminal seem.
devel is aimed at testing new version to see what breaks, so in my opinion it would make sense to have Xfce 4.4beta1 to have bugs reported, unless you and the other xfce maintainers don't have enough time to handle the bug reports, communicate with upstream and fix with patches... But the fact that there are a lot of problem reports should be, in my opinion a strong reason to have it in devel (we're only at test1 this leave time to fix things before FC6).
In reply to comment #3: Yeah, I would agree with you if there was a expectation/plan/schedule that 4.4 final would be released before FC6 was released. However Xfce is not on a time based release schedule, releases are done when the developers are ready. I would hate to put a 4.4 beta into devel and then have FC6 released before the final is out. That would mean we would be shipping a beta release in a release branch of Fedora, which I wouldn't like at all. The next Xfce releases are likely to be 4.4beta2, then 4.4rc1, and 4.4rc2 before final (if they follow the same release pattern they have in the past). If one of the rc's comes out before FC6, I would be pretty happy to update to it, but I don't think the betas are a good idea. Back to the subject of this bug, I have been testing exo and Terminal updates here for the last few days and they are looking pretty stable. I want to pound on it a bit more, but can probibly push out an update in the next few days if no blocker comes along.
(In reply to comment #4) > In reply to comment #3: > > final is out. That would mean we would be shipping a beta release in a release > branch of Fedora, which I wouldn't like at all. You're perfectly right. If it isn't ready for the next release it would be very unpleasant. A possibility could be to have a xfce 4.4 parallel installable along 4.2, but it is likely to be a lot of work for little gain.
A patch is required to build on devel. I believe it also should be taken upstream. Patch1: conditionnaly_define_pygtk_symbols.diff %patch1 -p1
Created attachment 131265 [details] conditionally define pygtk symbols
Good catch... already fixed upstream in svn: http://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1815 I am leaning toward waiting for beta2 (hopefully out this next weekend) before pushing this update... does that sound reasonable?
it sound definitely reasonable.
Sorry for the delay here. I have made available beta2 versions of exo and Terminal for both fc5 and devel. You can find them at: http://www.scrye.com/exo-Terminal/ Can you test against those and let me know if you see any problems? If nothing shows up I will push those out to devel at least (and possibly fc5 as well).
I think I use those packages from http://www.scrye.com/xfce-4.4b1/development/RPMS/ since a few day. I haven't noticed anything wrong for exo or Terminal. Maybe exo and Terminal would feel even better in their repo with their Thunar friend currently at: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/Thunar-0.3.2-0.1.beta2.src.rpm :-)
Sorry for the delay. Unless something comes up I am probibly going to push exo from beta2 out to devel tomorrow. It's shown no problems here in the last few weeks. Upstream has 3 bugs filed against it, but they are all Enhancements planned for the next relelase. If exo (and Terminal which I will also likely push out tomorrow) show no issues for a while I will look at updating them in FC5 as well. As soon as exo is updated you should be able to test and submit your Thunar package. So if anyone sees any issues, let me know now. ;)
ok, I finally have gotten to pushing exo (and Terminal) out to devel. One minor issue is that I had the release wrong in my test repo, so the new versions in devel will not show as rpm newer than the old ones from my test repo. You will have to 'rpm -e exo' and install from devel to get the correct version. If all looks good for a bit I will consider pushing them out to fc5 as well. In any case, I will close this bug for now and if you spot any issues with the new exo, please file a new bug.
A number is higher than a letter for rpm versionning, if I'm not wrong, and the packages get updated. However the upgrade path with the xfce44beta repo is broken, since the exo in devel appears newer than the one in xfce44beta, with a dependency on libxfce4util.so.1 which is in devel but not in xfce44beta which has libxfce4util.so.4. To fix that you could for example name the package 0.3.1.8-0.2.beta2.fc6 or 0.3.1.8-0.1.xfcebeta.fc6 in xfc44beta.
Sorry about that. The xfce44beta repo should be updated now.