On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:42:48 -0400
Daniel Drake <dsd(a)laptop.org> wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 14:28 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
Forks are still needed for some of these:
gnash was forked to bring dependencies down, I don't think we want
those deps back.
Ah, then gnash should go on the 'forked for deps' list, and we should
work to get those deps split out.
I'm happy to unfork ntp now that Fedora have made the same
changes.
How can I do that?
I think you just need to request that someone on the infrastructure
team untag ntp from olpc-3. Dennis can do that, and probably anything
else that needs doing.
pygame fork is needed. I have tried to get upstream to take our
changes so that we can unfork. No response yet.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457074
I just emailed Chris Stone and asked him if he minds if I go ahead and
make the change (or he can). This is probably an effective strategy
for this sort of thing - the interested part(y|ies) in OLPC-land can
just sign up to co-maintain the Fedora package, and get things done.
It should be less work than having an entirely separate fork.
> > > ./texlive/OLPC-3
> > rebuild against the old poppler
> > > ./poppler/OLPC-3
> > using an old version not sure why.
>
> Who can investigate poppler and maybe figure out what's up?
It should be easy to fix, but we seemed to reach consensus that it is
too late to upgrade this for our 8.2 release which we are rapidly
closing in on.
Ok. As long as there's a need and a roadmap, having a fork isn't bad.
> Are there BZ's filed for these so work can be done to split
up the
> Fedora packages so OLPC can only take the smallest bits?
sugar-evince:
http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/7926
http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/7927
SDL_mixer: don't think so
gnome-python2:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456122
olpcsound: don't think so, but actually forking and providing seperate
source tarballs is what upstream have agreed to. I think we should
just build this in F-9 instead.
gstreamer-plugins-base: no bugzilla that I know of
gnome-vfs2: don't think so.
Excellent. I'm going to try to get all this data in the wiki tonight
so we don't lose track of it.
> > > ./totem/OLPC-3
> > need a minimal totem that doesnt bring in perl and some gnome
> > libraries, F-9's was horribly broken, we are using totem from
> > rawhide
> > > ./totem-pl-parser/OLPC-3
> > needed version from rawhide to match totem. it had better
> > Requires
>
> Is there a BZ to track this?
totem-pl-parser wasn't forked to match totem, it was instead forked to
drop a humongous dependency chain.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456113
I don't see this being fixed upstream or in Fedora any time soon:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=522639
Well, it looks like Matt Barnes is continuing to work on splitting
camel <-> EDS, so there's hope for the future, even if it takes awhile.
-RN
--
Robin Norwood
Red Hat, Inc.
"The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone."
-Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching