I am glad to hear that. However are our package ready to be loaded on to
interpid?
Quoting Ryan Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have it on word from folks in irc on #ubuntu-devel that we're going
to
try to get it in 8.04.1 - the first hardy update in 3 months, when the
cd's are re-spun. The
Ryan,
does this package provide python-abiword too? I do not see that in the
PPA. It is the component used by Sugar if available and it was buildable
from the svn sources of Abiword as of november 2007.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug
And what about Internet updates? We don't need to wait for a new CD to
get it! Anyway, great work - even if we only get it via a backport, it's
easy to install.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I've found an issue (I don't know if this is really a bug) in 2.6 about
the ordering of the fonts list not pushing at the end Arabic fonts
anymore, but I don't know whether this is Ubuntu-related. Since I cannot
report it in Ubuntu, I've put it here:
Just curious, did 2.6 make it into hardy, or is this now something that
must wait for hardy+1?
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct subscriber.
--
I have it on word from folks in irc on #ubuntu-devel that we're going to
try to get it in 8.04.1 - the first hardy update in 3 months, when the
cd's are re-spun. The current CD's include the old AbiWord.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this
The tendency to split packages is a debian/ubuntu thing that sometimes
catches users (and developers!) off guard if you're unaware of it -- the
primary reason, IIRC, is to allow people to save space by removing parts
of software they don't need. (For example, there are separate linux-
image-
** Attachment added: diff between 0ubuntu1 and 0ubuntu2
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13762989/fixes_to_abi2620ubuntu1.diff
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a
Scrolling bit has already been mentioned - it's something weird with
Ubuntu only, will take a look later though I fear it's lower in the
stack than Abi and so I have little experience debugging down there.
Fixed the bug issues in the changelog. (formatting and location) I
tried to find the
I'm not a ubuntu dev; just a passer-by user, but since you check for
pdftoabw at runtime, perhaps you want to have poppler-utils as a
suggests: or recommends: now to match the dropped libpoppler
dependency?
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this
Good catch on poppler-utils, Michael, didn't realize that poppler was
split. I have had to update the package some more since the previous
package (2.4.6) left out some explicit dependencies to just be pulled in
by other libs which we don't use anymore. I have corrected those errors
- please
I am having troubles scrolling with my mouse in this version, it is sort
of choppy..using abiword - 2.6.2-0ubuntu1
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct
OK - I have uploaded the 0ubuntu1 version to my PPA, with a rewritten
summary changelog that goes in one step from the last ubuntu 2.4.6 (as
in, the version in the archive now) right to the 2.6.2-0ubuntu1,
combining all my PPA edits and the more formal discussion of patches
above. I also have
Ryan Pavlik [2008-04-16 20:00 -]:
Ah, great, thanks, didn't get that :) Should I leave in all my
0ubuntu0~ppaXX changelog entries?
IMHO it is easier to read if all relevant changelog entries are
condensed into one version, since the PPA versions are not relevant
for the main Ubuntu
Apologies for the ping, but I am posting to let you know that the
ppa20 builds that incorporate all actionable feedback I received are
ready to go. At this point, I'd like to know if there are more material
changes I should be making, or if we are waiting for the availability of
a specific
Ryan,
Thanks for the explanations of why the patches were dropped, but I did
mean that this should be documented in the changelog since that, rather
than this bug report, is where developers will look to understand the
package history later.
Can you please prepare a 2.6.2-0ubuntu1 package,
Ah, great, thanks, didn't get that :) Should I leave in all my
0ubuntu0~ppaXX changelog entries? Also, what's the call on the goffice
plugin? As long as I'm asking questions, should this final package go
on my PPA or should I just post a debdiff against ~ppa20 here to avoid a
non-PPA tagged
There are a few issues I found in the packaging changes:
- My main concern is that there are a lot of changes that put us in a position
where it will be harder to merge with Debian. My gut feeling is that we could
package 2.6.2 in a less intrusive way and if there are changes that should be
in
Many of the patches were obsoleted by the improvements to the build system in
2.6, so they didn't apply any more:
01_aaa_fix_plugins_m4 (in the 2.4.6 package but not in 00list!)
01_relibtoolize
02_no_pedantic_configure
09_bad_MANIFEST_omission
The language patches are obsolete due to string
Now replying to Daniel, who posted while I wrote this one:
AbiWord Common: This one is easy - in 2.6 we eliminated the difference
between the gnome and gtk-only builds of AbiWord. The only difference
is now a configure switch for gnomevfs, and given that I have used an
AbiWord non-gnomevfs build
Btw. does the AbiWord version currently being integrated into Hary suffer from
this bug (abiword waking up twice a sec when idle):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=335551
?
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification
I would imagine so, since both the incoming Ubuntu version and the
Fedora version are fairly true to upstream, and that bug is confirmed in
2.6.2. The filer of that bug (or perhaps you) should take that upstream
(if it's not there already, I think I remember filing that back when I
learned
Ryan,
The debdiff between the current and new version of the package shows
that several patches have been dropped, without explanation in the
changelog. Could you please document why each of these patches is no
longer applicable for the current version of abiword?
--
Please update to version
The View, Presentation is a little bug that should be forwarded
upstream, shouldn't be too tough to get a solution and I can easily
backport that patch or what have you.
I'd file the unicode bit too - I'm not sure how likely that is to be
fixed soon, but it's definitely good to know, and I might
Added the bug upstream :
http://bugzilla.abisource.com/show_bug.cgi?id=11539
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct subscriber.
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
Current (ppa16) packages fix the following bugs registered in Launchpad:
Bug #24195
Bug #56694
Bug #36807
Bug #58662
Bug #3197
Bug #118582
Possibly:
Bug #191194
Bug #150799
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are
I've tried the package but it has a huge scrolling bug for me : try to
scroll quickly with the mouse wheel, it scroll then go back to the
original location
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I can't see anything wrong on my fedora 8 build.
Can you give me some hint as to what the bug is?
Cheers
Martin
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Ryan Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can confirm that bug, Lionel. It is not a packaging bug, I believe,
as no source patches touch related
Please review build 2.6.2-0ubuntu0~ppa17 on my PPA for sponsorship and
upload. I see I need a debdiff - I will upload one, but the source
package is also new and there are some binary files that differ (icon,
about dialog image used on Windows at least) so they are omitted. The
debdiff might be
Just some notes from a quick review of the installed binary packages...
Other than a few minor polish items, this series of packages seems to be
very fast and stable. Someone who actually uses Abiword should check
them out, since they'll likely be able to do so in more depth than I can
cover,
This update is highly desired by the Xubuntu team and would be
appreciated by the Ubuntu team.
** Changed in: abiword (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Medium
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Hi Ryan,
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 04:39:34PM -, Ryan Pavlik wrote:
Right now an issue is coming up with a compile-time-only dependency on a
libasio-dev, which is just a collection of header files. Unfortunately,
Ubuntu has this in Universe, and so to stay in Main and enable collaboration
Getting there - ppa10 should have fixed menu items (with up to date
mimetype lists for the plugins). At this point, with help from #ubuntu-
devel, I'm working on the libasio-dev MIR, and if that doesn't work,
we'll go for #3. Being that it is an easy thing to change, I have also
removed the
Steve Langasek steve.langasek-at-canonical.com |AbiWord Bugzilla| wrote:
Hi Ryan,
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 04:39:34PM -, Ryan Pavlik wrote:
Right now an issue is coming up with a compile-time-only dependency on a
libasio-dev, which is just a collection of header files. Unfortunately,
I just installed the package from Ryan's PPA, and it seems to work quite
well for me.
Ryan: is the version on the PPA that is currently up a candidate for
more detailed testing and inclusion?
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug
ppa12 is building, fixing some small errors that prevented the build
from succeeding. The libasio-dev MIR is in -
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asio/+bug/213688
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are
I see now looking at the build logs that I will have to write up another
MIR for libwv-1.2. This is maintained by the AbiWord developers
(specifically Dom Lachowicz, AbiWord maintainer) and is nearly a piece
of abiword itself - it is just a shared library so that folks can use it
if they need
The PPA has moved here: https://launchpad.net/~abiryan/+archive/ (to
get rid of my messy email and match the nick used everywhere else). The
latest packages should have things working correctly, everything except
Collab. My current task is the MIR for libwv-1.2.
--
Please update to version
After a discussion with Martin and Sarah on #ubuntu-devel, an feature
freeze exception isn't going to be a problem. Please follow the normal
sponsorship process which is described at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess
Thanks,
Cody
--
Please update to version 2.6
The packages should not be separated - the four source packages are
unequivocally one single program. They are packaged together in all
other distributions that AbiWord developers can upload to. The issue is
that I neglected to point abiword-extras to the location of abiword. I
have corrected
OK, I have a working PPA package up. Left for me to do (hopefully
today) - work on the AbiWord Extras packaging (it should be in the main
binary package, I just need to compile it against an un-installed
package. Should be pretty easy - I have the Fedora spec file that does
the same thing.),
Will try to build it locally and see what happens, because it failed to
build in the PPA. Assuming that I can get it to succeed on my local
system, I will try uploading your sources to my PPA and see what
happens.
You may want to try again first, though, because it looks like maybe the
problem
Meh.. the build failed on my local machine, too. You may want to try
getting it to build in a pbuilder prior to uploading to PPA. Right now
it is failing for me in the ./configure stage.
Perhaps what needs to happen is simply to make the packages separate and
have the build-deps such that the
OK, well, it looks like I need one more spin of the binary to finish
implementing #2. I'd imagine I'm about 90% of the way there, about 30
minutes-1hr of work left.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 02:29:59PM -, Michael B. Trausch wrote:
Would this be a good time to break the abiword-* packages out into
separate source packages, one per each upstream package?
No, it wouldn't. Refactoring packages needs to be done toward the beginning
of a release cycle, not as
setting back to 'new'; confirmed is for freeze exceptions that have been
approved, which this one has not yet.
** Changed in: abiword (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = New
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are
From my perspective only one things matter.
If we take a what-if approach then it looks like this
It would be nice if we Ubuntu Hardy users could get this one, otherwise
its gonna be a long wait for us, atleast 6 months before Intrepid Ibex
comes out at which stage one could ask for backport
I am an average ubuntu desktop user, it is the first linux distro that
has worked for me. i had been trying on/off with different distro's
since 1999. I like ubuntu because it works and they release often. Now i
mention that you release often not because i like formatted/upgrading
all the time but
Status = Incomplete
Importance = Undecided
It's not incomplete. The bug is quite complete.
The importance can't be undecided. Abiword is a very popular program and Ubuntu
is going to be the only platform _not_ supporting it.
To me, it sounds like a release-braker.
Bureacracy is getting in the
There's no need for more We need 2.6 because I want it. I think
everyone would like to see 2.6. The question is How to get 2.6 in Hardy
?. It's a technical question.
If you can provide help to package Abiword 2.6 or to resolve technical
problems, you're welcome, otherwise please don't post any
Changing status to Confirmed; a diffstat has been provided and the Changelog
has been accounted for. (I suppose someone could get the source repository's
revision history, if absolutely necessary?)
The issue has also been commented on by many people, and the current objective
seems to be moving
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 11:58 +, Lionel Dricot wrote:
There's no need for more We need 2.6 because I want it. I think
everyone would like to see 2.6. The question is How to get 2.6 in
Hardy
?. It's a technical question.
If you can provide help to package Abiword 2.6 or to resolve
I think the primary reason for merging the source is that the plugin
source package *needs* the abiword *source package*, *not* just
libraries/header file in order to builld. This is the primary reason
why the sources were originally merged.
--
Please update to version 2.6
Based on the existing 2.4.6 Ubuntu packages (somewhat) and my first-hand
knowledge of AbiWord development, I have produced new Ubuntu packages of
AbiWord 2.6.0 and now 2.6.2 which fixes some basic issues in the 2.6.0
release and reduces dependencies. I've uploaded them to my PPA -
** Attachment added: abiword diffstat
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13126599/246-260.diffstat
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct subscriber.
--
and I forgot to add: there is no upstream changelog.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct subscriber.
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
now you have the 2 diffstat. one for abiword, one for the plugin.
** Attachment added: plugin diffstat
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13126615/plugins246-260.diffstat
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a
Debian Experimental does not yet have Abiword 2.6.0, either.
It looks like the Ubuntu source package unifies the 4 upstream packages
together into a single source package and builds multiple binary
packages from that source package. I am not entirely certain how that
would translate to updating
Just tossing in my 2 cents here:
2.6.0 has a number of visible changes, but the older version is unlikely
to have a significant ammount of support going into the future. This
means that, if any errors are observed with the 2.4.x series (eg: The
outstanding and very ugly bugs mentioned), it could
2.4.x will have _no_ support going in to the future. Changes to the 2.4
tree stopped being made quite some time ago, due to the large number of
cleanups and improvements to the 2.6.x tree. 2.4.x has been closed for
some time, and AbiWord 2.6 is already in Fedora and SuSE. It would be
very
A few more points to support the inclusion of abiword-2.6.0 in th
eupcoming Unbuntu release.
This is a major update. Asking for a changelog is insane. It has be in
excess of 100,000 LOC. There is no way anyone is going to be able to
review that.
We have fixed hundreds of bugs since 2.4.6 which
2.4.6 is exceedingly old - released in November 2006. 2.6.0 contains a
lot of stability improvements, memory/performance improvements,
import/export enhancements, and so on. Including it (with the fixed bug
24195 to support ODF within the abiword package) in Hardy would be a
very important step
It would be great to have Abiword 2.6 in Hardy.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Developers, which is a direct subscriber.
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
The ODF plugin bug is bug 24195.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Team, which is subscribed to abiword in ubuntu.
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
The official announcement is now on the homepage.
Updating to 2.6.0 would fix bug 6710 bug 56694 bug 76396 bug 65566 and
bug 118582 in ubuntu.
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Team,
It would also help the Sugar (OLPC environment) packages already in
Ubuntu, some of which use Abiword 2.6's collaboration features and the
python bindings. The debian maintainer of Abiword (mhatta) said he'd be
unable to work on it until the end of the week.
--
Please update to version 2.6
Also fixes bug 99367
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Team, which is subscribed to abiword in ubuntu.
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
and maybe at the same time you could fix the package to have ODF by
default (forgot the bug #, but definitely here) ?
--
Please update to version 2.6
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/202174
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Xubuntu
Team, which is subscribed to abiword
Please provide a full upstream changelog and a diffstat for the new
version, per https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess.
Also, it doesn't appear from www.abiword.com that 2.6 has been released
yet? We can't make a very informed decision about granting a freeze
exception for software
On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 23:53 +, Steve Langasek wrote:
Also, it doesn't appear from www.abiword.com that 2.6 has been
released
yet?
It has been released, but not really announced because they are waiting
for the binaries for the proprietary OS.
Hub
--
Please update to version 2.6
70 matches
Mail list logo
