Re: build status
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 07:23 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote: Doesn't build with gtk3: evolution-data-server gtkhtml ... Needs e-d-s: evolution ... Hi, there are 'gtk3' branches in these, where the development towards gtk3 compliance is done, though even with these branches everything may not work completely. Nonetheless, I would suggest to use these branches in your builds until the development from there will hit git master. Bye, Milan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-spidermonkey?
On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 11:23 +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 08:33 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: 2010/12/11 Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com: On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 13:16 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Basically, I want us to be decoupled from this; there are conceptually actually 4 layers. NSPR - spidermonkey - xulrunner - firefox Where - is depends on. Right now at least Fedora ships like: NSPR - (spidermonkey xulrunner firefox) Where () is tightly coupled, meaning that gjs and gnome-shell are tightly coupled to firefox. Having a separate xulrunner as a project hasn't really worked - it's a *huge*, enormous codebase. Spidermonkey on the other hand has always nominally supported being built seprately; it has its own configure script, etc. Probably better way would be to work on parallel installation of xulrunner and/or spidermonkey then forking. I.e. if needed there should be possible to install, for example, xulrunner 2.0 and xulrunner 2.1 at the same time. This is already possible for xulrunner in most distributions. Then probably the problem is Fedora itself then coupling. Since otherwise the gnome-shell/gjs are coupled to particular branch of xulrunner if I understand correctly. Can't really follow this. There are two different strategies I know of for building other packages against Firefox: Use rpaths in the binaries. GNOME Shell needs to be rebuilt for every minor release of Firefox whether the ABI changes or not. Put the libmozjs.so in the system linker paths using /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ Fedora takes the second approach. Neither approach gives you transparent parallel installs of different ABI-guaranteed versions of Spidermonkey and: I guess update xulrunner 1.9.x - xulrunner 1.9.(x+1) does not require code changes Upstream doesn't make this guarantee as far as I know. (Yes, changes within 1.9.x have been small compared to the difference between 1.9.x and 2.0) so the problem can be derefered to distributions (updates, updating fx/gjs/gnome-shell when ABI changes for example due to inlining etc.). While certainly the fact that security updates for Firefox could require code changes to GNOME Shell is a problem, and yes, parallel installation can get around that at the expense of extra disk space usage and packaging complexity, it's not the only point. We need a smallish amount of code. The complete Firefox build in the jhbuild takes a long time. We want to have a common version of Spidermonkey for all distributions shipping GNOME rather than wildly divergent versions. - Owen ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-spidermonkey?
2010/12/13 Owen Taylor otay...@redhat.com: On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 11:23 +, Maciej Piechotka wrote: On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 08:33 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: 2010/12/11 Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com: On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 13:16 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: Basically, I want us to be decoupled from this; there are conceptually actually 4 layers. NSPR - spidermonkey - xulrunner - firefox Where - is depends on. Right now at least Fedora ships like: NSPR - (spidermonkey xulrunner firefox) Where () is tightly coupled, meaning that gjs and gnome-shell are tightly coupled to firefox. Having a separate xulrunner as a project hasn't really worked - it's a *huge*, enormous codebase. Spidermonkey on the other hand has always nominally supported being built seprately; it has its own configure script, etc. Probably better way would be to work on parallel installation of xulrunner and/or spidermonkey then forking. I.e. if needed there should be possible to install, for example, xulrunner 2.0 and xulrunner 2.1 at the same time. This is already possible for xulrunner in most distributions. Then probably the problem is Fedora itself then coupling. Since otherwise the gnome-shell/gjs are coupled to particular branch of xulrunner if I understand correctly. Can't really follow this. There are two different strategies I know of for building other packages against Firefox: Use rpaths in the binaries. GNOME Shell needs to be rebuilt for every minor release of Firefox whether the ABI changes or not. Unless you ensure rpath are done to a stable path (for instance /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.2 which is a symlink to latest installed release of 1.9.2.x). so the problem can be derefered to distributions (updates, updating fx/gjs/gnome-shell when ABI changes for example due to inlining etc.). While certainly the fact that security updates for Firefox could require code changes to GNOME Shell is a problem, and yes, parallel installation can get around that at the expense of extra disk space usage and packaging complexity, it's not the only point. We need a smallish amount of code. The complete Firefox build in the jhbuild takes a long time. Don't build FF in jhbuild, use the one provided by your distribution. -- Frederic Crozat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-spidermonkey?
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote: Hey, Comments from people creating operating systems derived from GNOME would be appreciated here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636977 Basically, I'd like a gnome-spidermonkey package which uses *exactly* the same sources as upstream, just with a renamed .pc file etc., for the reasons listed in the bug. If you object or have comments, let me know. Maybe we could re-evaluate using libv8? *hides* -- Patryk Zawadzki ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-spidermonkey?
On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 16:20 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: We need a smallish amount of code. The complete Firefox build in the jhbuild takes a long time. Don't build FF in jhbuild, use the one provided by your distribution. A) FF in your distribution might provide one of two very different APIs at this point. We support both but at a considerable cost in developer time,. B) It really sucks if we have something in the moduleset that takes forever to build, clogs up build.gnome.org, fails frequently, and that the experts know that they should be adding to skip_modules. In many cases, the solution here is to make jhbuild smarter about when a system package provides what we need, but not sure that's the solution here. - Owen ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
[Fwd: Bump external dependency on libgdata]
Done. jhbuild and the wiki have been updated. Philip Forwarded Message From: Philip Withnall phi...@tecnocode.co.uk To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org desktop-devel-list@gnome.org Subject: Bump external dependency on libgdata Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 22:02:43 + Hi all, Are there any objections to me bumping the external dependency on libgdata's minimum version to 0.6.6 (from 0.6.4)? I've just released 0.6.6 to fix various leaks and crashes, and fix the test suites to work with the changes to g_str_hash() in GLib master. If there aren't any objections after a few days, I'll go ahead and update the wiki and jhbuild. Thanks, Philip signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-spidermonkey?
El lun, 13-12-2010 a las 16:25 +0100, Patryk Zawadzki escribió: On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote: Hey, Comments from people creating operating systems derived from GNOME would be appreciated here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636977 Basically, I'd like a gnome-spidermonkey package which uses *exactly* the same sources as upstream, just with a renamed .pc file etc., for the reasons listed in the bug. If you object or have comments, let me know. Maybe we could re-evaluate using libv8? *hides* Or JavaScriptCore? *ducks* ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Crossdesktop at FOSDEM: call for papers
Hi everyone, Just a reminder that the deadline is coming in less than 10 days (22nd of December). This year, GNOME won't have its own devroom for a day as the previous years, but the crossdesktop devroom will run for two days. So if you were planning to give a talk in the GNOME devroom, you'll have to apply for one in the crossdesktop devroom instead. Cheers, Christophe (call for paper email below) 2010/11/16 Christophe Fergeau t...@gnome.org: [Forwarding this email on Bart's behalf, I'll be the gnome contact for the fosdem devroom] FOSDEM is one of the biggest Free and Open Source events. It is held annually in Brussels, Belgium, and attended by around 4000 people. This year we will have a devroom for 2 days dedicated to Cross-Desktop talks and topics. As opposed to previous years, there will be no KDE, or Gnome, or XFCE specific devrooms this year. The cross-desktop devroom will have talks on all topics that are interesting to the users and developers of all desktop environments. FOSDEM will be held on the weekend of 5 and 6th February 2011, and the deadline for submissions for papers is Wednesday 22nd December 2010. We're looking for developers, users and contributors to submit talks for inclusion on the program. We are specifically looking for topics that are of interest to the users and developers of all desktop environments. Please submit your proposals to: crossdesk...@lists.fosdem.org Please include the following information when submitting a proposal: * Your name * The title of your talk (please be descriptive, as titles will be listed with ~250 from other projects) * A short abstract of one to two paragraphs The deadline for submissions is Wednesday 22nd December 2010. FOSDEM will be held on the weekend of 5 and 6th February 2011. Kind regards, Bart Coppens ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
