i'm CC'ing the upstream lead developer of gmime here to see if he has
any thoughts (and can correct any misrepresentations from me) -- Hi Jeffrey!

On 05/30/2011 02:43 PM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> On Sun, 29 May 2011 11:44:05 -0700, Dirk Hohndel <hohn...@infradead.org> 
> wrote:
>> CC -O2 notmuch-reply.o
>> notmuch-reply.c: In function ‘notmuch_reply_command’:
>> notmuch-reply.c:658:3: error: unknown type name ‘GMimeSession’
>> notmuch-reply.c:659:3: warning: passing argument 1 of 
>> ‘g_mime_gpg_context_new’ from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
>> /usr/include/gmime-2.6/gmime/gmime-gpg-context.h:64:21: note: expected 
>> ‘GMimePasswordRequestFunc’ but argument is of type ‘int *’
>> make: *** [notmuch-reply.o] Error 1
>> This seems to have been introduced in Jameson's crypto patch series...
>> ./configure shows:
>> Checking for Xapian development files... Yes (1.2.4).
>> Checking for GMime development files... Yes (gmime-2.6).
>> Checking for Glib development files (>= 2.14)... Yes.
> Hey, Dirk.  Looks like you're using gmime-2.6, which is something I've
> never looked at, and it looks like there are API changes.  This of
> course doesn't help you, Dirk, but this probably means we should require
> libgmime-2.4, at least until we can figure out how to support both
> versions, which I'm not sure how to handle.
> Dirk, just out of curiosity, what system are you running that is
> provides gmime 2.6?

F15 probably means Fedora 15.

gmime 2.6 has not been released yet; gmime 2.5 is the development
version (which itself has an unstable API); the project uses the
even=stable/odd=unstable version numbering scheme.

As the dev version, gmime 2.5 identifies itself as 2.6.  I'm not sure i
can justify this decision.  Jeffrey, can you explain?

If F15 does not have gmime 2.4 available in it, it's possible that it
may not be able to build notmuch :/

I don't think that notmuch should attempt to target a library with an
unstable API.  But if anyone is interested in preparing for the gmime
2.6 release (maybe jeffrey can hint at the timeline for us) may want to
prepare changesets that #ifdef the relevant code depending on the API

Once gmime 2.6 is released, we'll need to decide if we want to remain
compatible with the old API as well, or just require gmime 2.6; but i
don't think we need to cross that bridge right now.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

notmuch mailing list

Reply via email to