Re: Updated gnome-* RPMs

[Gleef <dzol virtual-yellow com>]

On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, Richard Caldwell wrote:
> I've said this before and since nobody cares I guess it won't hurt to say
> it again.  It's ridiculous to release RPMs for a bug infested mess like
> Gnome 1.0 and then not release RPMs for the bug fixes as soon as possible.

I've said this before, and since many people don't seem to hear, I guess
it won't hurt to say it again.  GNOME DOESN'T RELEASE RPMS.

The GNOME releases are in tarball form.  People use these tarballs to
make RPMs, debs, tgzs, whatever they want.  The RPMs that are on our FTP
site are made by RedHat Labs, according to their own schedule.


> Are we inflicting some kind of purgatory on users foolish enough to
> download the first release?

We aren't trying to, that's why we make bugfix releases like 1.0.3.


> I was willing to spend some of what little free time I have chasing bugs
> for this project because I think it's a brilliant piece of work that needs
> a lot of polishing.  Unfortunately I'm wasting all my time dealing with the
> maze of twisty little passages that results from mixing RPMs and tarballs.

If you want to help debug GNOME and stay sane, try using just RPMs for the
basics (eg. glib, gtk+, imlib, etc.), and tarballs for everything GNOME
(eg. gnome-libs, libgtop, etc.).  If you use some GNOME RPMs and some
GNOME tarballs, you will get unpredicable behavior.

 
> Fine, whatever.  I'll use what I have and wait for the big "RedHat 6.0 is
> ready for the desktop" announcement that seems to be the holy grail of this
> whole project anyway.

If you think that a RedHat anouncement is the "holy grail of this whole
project", I suggest you reread the GNOME Manifesto at
http://www.gnome.org/about/manifesto.shtml


Best of Luck,
-Gleef