Re: debian packages in ftp.gnome-db.org



Hi!

On Sat, Dec 02, 2000 at 01:41:32PM +0900, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 13:41:32 +0900
> From: Akira TAGOH <tagoh gnome-db org>
> To: Holger Thon <holger gidayu max uni-duisburg de>
> Cc: gnome-db-list gnome org
> Subject: OT: Re: debian packages in ftp.gnome-db.org
> In-Reply-To: <20001201194039 A3230 linux2 cluster-dynip de>
> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.4.0 (Rio) EMY/1.13.9 (Art is long, life is short) FLIM/1.14.0 (Ninokuchi) APEL/10.2 MULE XEmacs/21.2 (beta37) (Pan) (i386-debian-linux)
> Organization: GNOME-DB Project
> 
> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:40:39 +0100,
> >>>>> "HT" == Holger Thon <holger gidayu max uni-duisburg de> wrote:
> 
> HT> Hi!
> HT> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 08:23:55PM +0900, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> >> 
> >> Is debian's potato tree provide gnome-db?
> >> That can't probably be here. because potato doesn't include
> >> bonobo, and potato's GNOME is October GNOME. it's too old.
> 
> I think that it doesn't label potato. people can installed
> Helix GNOME in potato. but Helix GNOME based on woody at the
> time.

Oops, you are right, it's just for woody. It's a deb-src line...
But still there are the 2 other sources: 
- Linuxland distribution
  http://www.linuxland.de/katalog/01_linuxdistri_bs/debian/5_debian22nurcds/framify
- ftp://ftp.fsn.hu/pub/CDROM-Images-mounted/debian-unofficial-cd/potato-i386-extra.raw/
  or
  ftp://ftp.fsn.hu/pub/CDROM-Images/debian-unofficial-cd/potato-i386-extra.raw

> 
> HT> So what i repackaged additionaly is (got of nautilus sources/woody sources):
> HT> - bonobo 0.28
> HT> - gconf 0.11
> HT> - oaf 0.6.1
> HT> - unixodbc 1.8.13
> HT> - sybase ase 11.9.2 fake packages to meet dependencies
> 
> HT> I suggest to put these packages into dists/potato/extra/binary-i386.
> HT> The libgda stuff for potato would be in dists/potato/main/binary-i386/misc.
> HT> An apt.sources would read like:
> 
> if you put those packages in ftp.gnome-db.org, you should
> change it to the debian version that it doesn't conflict
> with all the things that those packages are provided.

It's just a patch release more for bonobo and oaf and gconf, so there should
be no version conflicts (still bonobo 0.28, oaf 0.6.1 and gconf 0.11).

> 
> >> 
> >> even if we provide the potato's gnome-db, I think that it
> >> isn't almost different from woody.
> 
> potato is stable version. Why do you use potato? to get the
> environment for which to become stable? if so, you are
> understood why those *unstable* packages aren't put on the
> tree?

Yes. The main reason why i didn't dist-upgrade to woody is, that first there
is an unstable gcc version and second the bleeding edge version of glibc 2.2.
And i couldn't just set gcc and glibc to keep, because these are needed by
the other packages.
Thus i have the stable packages installed and a handful of unstable packages
which i know of. :-)

It's the same question for using rawhide or Redhat 7, Mandrake  or 
Mandrake 7.x and so on... ;-)

> 
> HT> As an attachment you get the packages files, so you can decide if they should
> HT> come onto ftp or not. The binaries (gda stuff + additional packages) are
> HT> 5 MB.
> 
> the people who use woody are the same, too :)

Sure. I dist-upgraded to potato in March last year.

Ciao,

  Holger




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]