On 24 April 2011 06:17, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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 2.0.0 to build, that's because they are out-of-date.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?
It would just mean we would have lone updated redland/raptor packages,
just so things can tango along with KDE. Otherwise, the particular KDE
functionality can be removed. It is up to Andrea in that case.
--
GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10
