you probably have to apply the ubuntu tilix "pcre2-version-update" patch
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update gnome-terminal to 3.24 and
I just tried building tilix to see if I could add some feature and hit
this :(
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update gnome-terminal to 3.24
tilix seems to be warning-free with unpatched vte. Someone has posted
these warnings upstream: https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/1428 and
the response was "Please open a bug with Ubuntu, since they patch vte to
remove pcre2 regular expressions this issue is likely caused by that." a
** Bug
Fix: "I have to admit I don't know what this regex *flag* is for..."
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update gnome-terminal to 3.24 and vte
> So the cause is that the MULTILINE flag is just that not set during
compilation?
Compilation of the regex when running tilix, not compilation of the
source code.
I have to admit I don't know what this regex is for, and whether
required in unpatched vte or not. If tilix is warning-free with
thanks a lot for the clarification, this is really helping me to
understand that! I am just a noob who wants to learn something and wants
to find the cause of a problem which annoys me. Thus, i invested some
time to dig into the problem :)
So the cause is that the MULTILINE flag is just that not
> As you can see both arguments itself are true.
The first two arguments you printed are bitmasks, it doesn't make sense
to directly interpret them as boolean.
> But why is a "bitwise and" used in g_warn_if_fail()?
Because that's what it wants to do: warn if the MULTILINE flag isn't
set,
i should be more precise with the file name... the specific line is in
src/vtegtk.cc line 1906
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update
Hi everyone,
I don't know which is the right place to post this, but the discussion
here seems to be the most appropriate for bringing this up.
I looked more into the tilix warnings. After all, the warnings seem to be
caused by the vte lib and especially in the reverted parts.
Therefore, I
ari, i already have created a bug report for the tilix log messages:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tilix/+bug/1785885
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
Ari, if tilix is logging excessively, please report the issue to the
tilix developers. The Ubuntu tilix patch is really minimal and shouldn't
have that effect.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
This is still breaking tilix functionality and polluting the logs.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update gnome-terminal to 3.24 and vte to
This is really a mess. If we as developers cannot trust a particular
version of a library to contain the features advertised by the
documentation then that is a big problem.
As a developer working on open source software in my spare time I have
enough to do to keep up with the latest library
Just throwing my hat in the ring as absolutely no one of influence: I
think reverting functionality that is understood to be in a particular
version of a package is inviting breakage.
If VTE 0.48.x is understood to have PCRE2 support, as announced by the
VTE developers, then applications that
I have an upstream bug report for tilix in Ubuntu 17.10 where the VTE is
complaining about not supporting PCRE2 despite VTE reporting that it is
version 0.48.2 which should support it.
https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/916
Is this caused by Ubuntu going with the #3 option and reverting the
This bug was fixed in the package gnome-terminal - 3.24.1-0ubuntu2
---
gnome-terminal (3.24.1-0ubuntu2) artful; urgency=medium
* Revert 01_onlyshowin.patch to use Unity instead of Unity7
to fix test failure triggered by desktop-file-validate
-- Jeremy Bicha
This bug was fixed in the package vte2.91 - 0.48.2-0ubuntu2
---
vte2.91 (0.48.2-0ubuntu2) artful; urgency=medium
* Don't depend or build-depend on libpcre2-dev
-- Jeremy Bicha Tue, 02 May 2017 14:28:14 -0400
** Changed in: vte2.91 (Ubuntu)
Status:
Fred, please file a different bug for that issue.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1666264
Title:
FFe: Update gnome-terminal to 3.24 and vte to 0.48
Status in
This is how my GNOME Terminal 3.20.2 looks under Wayland.
It looks as expected under X though.
Notice the ugly broken shadow.
** Attachment added: "GNOME Terminal 3.20.2 on Wayland"
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: vte2.91 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: gnome-terminal (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-terminal in Ubuntu.
Unfortunately, upstream for gnome-terminal and vte doesn't care to
provide NEWS files.
I said that gnome-terminal and vte hadn't changed much in the 3.24 cycle but
there were changes in the 3.22 (0.46) cycle
- Add systemd user service
- Add Detach Terminal action to tab context menu (this is
I'm not seeing a compelling reason to switch to 3.24 and the newer vte
other than the version bump.
If your argument is that after this revert, both gnome-terminal and vte
are effectively identical feature-wise as what we have in the archive
right now, then you're not introducing or removing
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 01:00:02PM -, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> I don't like the revert idea either.
>
> But like I pointed out almost 4 months ago, there are just 3 options, right?
> 1. Accept PCRE2 in main
> 2. Keep gnome-terminal at 3.20 and vte at 0.44 indefinitely
> 3. Revert the PCRE2
I don't like the revert idea either.
But like I pointed out almost 4 months ago, there are just 3 options, right?
1. Accept PCRE2 in main
2. Keep gnome-terminal at 3.20 and vte at 0.44 indefinitely
3. Revert the PCRE2 changes, which allows postponing a choice between the first
two.
I don't
Oh come on, there's no hive mind conspiracy against you here, you know
that. It's individual developers answering questions that are asked of
them and giving you their own judgement. If you'd have asked me before
starting this work then I would have given the same answer ("do it only
if the other
Isn't that the opposite of how Feature Freeze Exception requests go,
that it should be more likely to be accepted if there are *not* many
changes?
Yesterday, it was reported that Ubuntu will have GNOME 3.24. And the
first thing a GNOME packager for another distro said was well it isn't
really
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 06:15:21PM -, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> ** Changed in: vte2.91 (Ubuntu)
>Importance: Undecided => Low
>
> ** Description changed:
>
> gnome-terminal and vte are still at their 3.20 (and 0.44) versions
> because they now hard-depend on pcre2, but the pcre2 MIR (LP:
** Changed in: vte2.91 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Description changed:
gnome-terminal and vte are still at their 3.20 (and 0.44) versions
because they now hard-depend on pcre2, but the pcre2 MIR (LP: #163)
has stalled because there is already one version of pcre in
29 matches
Mail list logo