On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Ray Rashif <schiv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 23 April 2011 22:36, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Andrea Scarpino <andrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Saturday 23 April 2011 10:19:42 you wrote:
>>>> I see that the {redland,rasqal}-compat packages conflict with
>>>> {redland,rasqal}. In the case of redland-1.0.13-1 and
>>>> redland-compat-1.0.12-1 that means I cannot have both at the same
>>>> time. Which means I have to choose between kdelibs (depends on
>>>> soprano, hence redland-compat) and slv2 (depends on redland-1.0.13)
>>>> (or, in my system, between having KDE software and having ardour).
>>>>
>>>> Any way around this? I'm wondering why redland-compat isn't at the
>>>> same version as redland, though I'm sure if this has been done there's
>>>> a pretty good reason.
>>> Hi,
>>> first of all rasqal > 0.9.21 and redland > 1.0.12, both requires raptor >=
>>> 2.0.0 to build, that's because they are out-of-date.
>>> Said that, we cannot ship a redland-base package (for example) and add a
>>> redland-compat package which provides the libraries built with raptor1 and
>>> depends on redland-base.
>>>
>>> The only way to install the both version redland and redland-compat is to
>>> rename every file in the redland-compat package, (maybe using --program-suffix/-
>>> prefix) but this will require patches for things like soprano (cmake files and
>>> headers have to point to the -compat stuff). Patches are welcome.
>>>
>>> I've no others idea. We've to wait KDE devs port it to raptor2.
>>>
>> Fair enough. I don't think the combination of (for example) KDE and
>> any non-KDE app depending on redland is all that rare. Come to think
>> of it, doesn't libreoffice depend on redland as well?
>>
>> Not that I've any say in this, but it does seem if this rebuild is
>> moved out of [testing] there'll be lots of conflicts. Not sure what
>> else is affected, but basically whatever packages have been affected
>> by this rebuild (at least the redland portion of it) now does not
>> function with KDE?
>
> You are correct. That's libreoffice and audacity, as can be seen now.
> I think the rebuild was done slightly wrong. All these should be
> changed to depend on compat packages.
>
Wouldn't that mean that everything would then depend on redland (and
not on redland-compat)? No reason to rebuild, then?
