On 2010-03-03, Mark Knecht <markkne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> When upgrading a machine today, I saw a notice that mythtv 0.21 has
>> now been hardmasked. ??I think it's because it depends on an obsolte
>> version of Qt. ??Don't get me started on the royal PITA of requiring
>> that Qt be installed for a backend-only setup on a server.
>>
>> Since 0.21 and 0.23 is hardmasked, and mythv 0.22 is unstable on
>> everything except the amd64 platform, what's an X86 user to do?
> I think this is being handled badly but that sort of the way it is for
> a few days anyway. Shortly 0.22 will be unmasked as stable if it isn't
> already, but there are LOTS and LOTS of things we need to be careful
> about when changing or the Myth database will get messed up and
> possibly be unusable.
I read the instructions for fixing the broken database encoding, but
it appears mine is fine -- so updating to 0.22 won't be quite as
painful as it might have been. I'll still have to re-build the
frontend, since 0.22 doesn't use a compatible protocol.
> It seems that a few devs can decide that something like qt3 is enough
> to force people to move forward. I've got 5 x64/amd64 frontends plus
> a backend PPC server. I'm not convinced they thought about this sort
> of mixed environment issue but that's the way it is.
>
> I am expecting that it's going to be a bad couple of weeks....
>
> I'd like to find some sort of sunset overlay for 0.21 but I haven't
> looked. Let me know if you go that way.
I'll probably try upgrading to 0.22.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! We're going to a
at new disco!
gmail.com
