Re: [gnome-db] a late gASQL

[Malerba_Vivien stna dgac fr]

le mar 16-10-2001 at 12:32 Rodrigo Moya a érit :
> > No problem, do you plan to make other name changes?
> > 
> which name changes did I do? (sorry, I can't remember right now :-)

For example gda_field_type() became gda_field_get_gdatype(),
gda_field_boolean() became gda_field_get_boolean_value()...

> 
> > > since it was a quick release we did Carlos and I the
> > > other evening to fix the problems that were having the people trying to
> > > do the RPMs (which don't seem to be fixed, BTW).
> > 
> > For 0.2.91, I had removed the default provider to build as I was
> > preparing a new version for gASQL.
> > 
> yes, that was the problem. This is fixed in 0.2.92, but we found other
> problems, related to RPM variables.
> 
> > > 
> > > This makes me ask if there's somebody on the list with RPM knowledge who
> > > could try the current spec files and fix them? Once they're fixed, we've
> > > got volunteers to make the RPMs for every version we release, so it
> > > would be a great help for us :-)
> > 
> > So far, I've made RPMS but I removed all the docs since there are some
> > problems with inexistant .omf files. I'll test the specs this week if
> > you want.
> > 
> hmm, can you send the output to see where it's failing? The .omf files
> are supposed to be in the latest versions.

I just downloaded the 0.2.92 tarball, I'm on a Mandrake 7.1 with Ximian
Gnome installed. Here are the results:
* there aren't any .omf files in the tarball.
* from the configure log, I don't have libxslt installed, and also no 
  gtkdoc-mkdb. Do you know if it is what is missing? (BTW which RPMS
  do you have for these packages?)


Vivien