On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:17:02 +0000 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Eric Smith <eric@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Kevin Fenzi wrote about gdk-pixbuf: > > > It failed the mass rebuild, not much left that depends on it, and > > > nothing I need. ;) > > [...] > > > >> So, if anyone really really really wants to keep it alive, feel > >> free to take it and fix it so it builds and works. ;) > > > > > > I use gdk-pixbuf in an application that is used on Fedora but for > > licensing reasons can't currently be submitted as a Fedora package. > > I'd hate to see gdk-pixbuf go away, as I don't know what I could > > use to replace it. I've never looked at building gdk-pixbuf > > myself, and have never been able to wrap my head around autotools, > > so if the cause of the FTBFS isn't obvious, I doubt that I can fix > > it quickly. I'm not going to commit to taking maintainership of > > the package right now, but if nobody else does and I find the time > > to deal with it, perhaps I will in the future. > > > > As far as I can tell, gdk-pixbuf hasn't been deprecated upstream; > > there was a new release in August. Has anyone notified upstream > > about the FTBFS? > > Are you sure your not referring to gdk-pixbuf2? I really suspect so. the gdk-pixbuf package is the gtk+ one in fedora. it's last release was december 2002. yes, thats right, almost exactly 9 years ago. ;) kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
