On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:42:40PM -0400, Eric Bélanger wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Andreas Radke <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> Am Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0400 > >> schrieb Dave Reisner <[email protected]>: > >> > >>> An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the > >>> applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold > >>> libpurple/pidgin back). > >> > >> Sounds good to me in this special case. We should do something to > >> cleanup staging. > >> > >> -Andy > > > > I started working on a libotr3 package. I'll rename/move things around > > so it doesn't conflict with libotr. Hopefully, packages will build > > against it with minor patching. I'll test that before pushing it to > > staging. It should be ready tomorrow. I'll let you know when it'll be > > done. > > > > Eric > > Hi, > > It took longer than I tough but there is now a libotr3 package in > staging. The major changes that afffects building against it is: > > - the headers moved from /usr/include/libotr/ to /usr/include/libotr3/ > - the library was renamed from libotr.so to libotr3.so
Sounds reasonable. > As a test, I tried rebuilding bitlbee against it and I only had to add > 2 small sed lines to make it work. We can now finish this todo list. Great! Thanks for doing this. d
