On Do, 2011-02-10 at 09:44 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mi, 2011-02-09 at 22:28 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> Two issues. First one is easy, is there a source file? :-) > > > > Yes, but I have been hiding it so that people don't start packaging > > it ;-) > > > > http://downloads.syncevolution.org/syncevolution/sources/experimental/syncevolution-1.1.99.2.tar.gz > > > > Seriously, I'd rather have some folks here on this list test that > > version before it gets rolled out to some unsuspecting distro users. The > > next version should be suitable for an unstable distro again. > > I'm not planning on pushing it to an "unsuspecting distro user" I push > it through my build system and test that it will compile on Fedora > rawhide using gcc 4.6 and all the fun things its introducing to give > "upstream" details of any issues so that they may review them within a > reasonable time.
That's of course worthwhile - thanks for testing that. > > Why is the usage of the Bluez gdbus a problem? I thought we had resolved > > the name clash by renaming the symbols in the SyncEvolution source code. > > Why is the submission of patches upstream a problem? I submitted them and Marcel has not responded, that's all. My impression is that the separate Bluez gdbus is dead and will never see a separate, official release. So in Fedora there really is a separate library and gupnp uses it? > As for chaanges of namespaces as far as I can tell its been shoved it > into a sub directory of syncevolution. The readme in the source tells > me as much when it documents the script to split out the patches. With > it in a sub directory the standard build of syncevolution doesn't find > it because its not in the ld path, if you add it to the path it > conflicts with the other library if installed. I'm not seeing the issue with it not being found during the build. What is your configure line? Regarding the library name clash: I agree, the library name should be different and it should get installed into /usr/lib/syncevolution. I'll check that. > > If someone has a patch which allows to switch between the Bluez gdbus > > and glib gdbus, then I'd be happy to include it. I just don't have time > > to do that myself. > > Personally I'd prefer if the patches were upstream and there was just > one of them and we didn't have to worry about hacks to "switch". Yes, of course. Me too, but that's outside of my control. I was thinking of the glib gdbus here. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
