Ken Moffat wrote: > On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 02:20:32AM +0000, Andrew Benton wrote: >> So what do people think, is it Ok to put pango-1.29 in the book? >> gtk+-3.2 requires pango-1.29. gtk+-3.2.2 is the current stable version >> of gtk+-3. It's a contradiction. Advice please. >> > It's required for gtk+-3.2.2. 1.29.4 is good enough to build that, > but 1.29.5 needs a development glibc. > > The whole upstream transition from gnome-2 to gnome-3 still looks > very messy. I started working through apparent dependencies last > night, starting at the end : gnome-media looks as if it will be > stuck in gtk2 for ever, but apparently there is a replacement that > uses pulse (- will try that in the future, but for now there are too > many other things I need to test in-use). Totem is at 3.2.1 but > requires totem-pl-parser which is still at 2.32.6.
Does it make sense to hold at gnome-2 for a few months until gnome-3 settles down? -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
