154102 gnome1-removal 2006-11-04 22:58 0000 Remove Gnome 1.x 2006-12-23 03:58:01 0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Gentoo Linux Ebuilds 2006.1 All Linux RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 70336 93095 102087 116809 119743 123668 125003 126003 131113 133253 133824 135283 138184 138418 143707 145557 145722 146447 150581 150926 151194 153210 154452 155000 155203 155216 155401 155406 155407 155413 155428 155430 155431 155454 155557 156193 156425 156702 158261 151381 155627 1 cardoe@gentoo.org gnome@gentoo.org aballier@gentoo.org compnerd@gentoo.org dberkholz@gentoo.org jkeiren@gmail.com kparent@enersea.net nelchael@gentoo.org nyhm@gentoo.org openhs@users.sourceforge.net pacho@condmat1.ciencias.uniovi.es pogosyan@phys.ualberta.ca voyageur@gentoo.org yvasilev@gentoo.org cardoe@gentoo.org 2006-11-04 22:58:25 0000 This is just a metabug for the request to remove Gnome 1.x from the tree. Please link all the bugs against Gnome 1.x packages as blockers of this bug. compnerd@gentoo.org 2006-11-06 12:11:06 0000 I am currently working towards this task. yvasilev@gentoo.org 2006-11-08 19:48:31 0000 What are the motives to remove gtk use flag from net-misc/unison and if removed, what will be the default behavior? It DEPENDs in >=dev-ml/lablgtk-2.2 for all but 2.9.1-r1 versions and all versions RDEPEND on net-misc/gtk2-ssh-askpass. compnerd@gentoo.org 2006-11-08 20:19:45 0000 Please do not create lists on this bug, I will be keeping the official list at http://compnerd.org/~compnerd/files/gnome-1.txt . Thanks for your understanding. vlado.paskov@gmail.com 2006-11-09 02:42:19 0000 What dev-util/glade-2 doing in the package removal list for Gnome 1.x? dev-util/glade-2 is GTK+2 app. vlado.paskov@gmail.com 2006-11-09 02:50:24 0000 Sorry there were a misunderstanding from my side :) dev-util/glade binary is named glade-2. openhs@users.sourceforge.net 2006-11-09 13:08:59 0000 Quick look to media-sound/grip homepage (http://www.nostatic.org/grip/grip-download.shtml) shows that: ------------------------- To use Grip, you must have: * The Gnome2 desktop ... ------------------------- It seems not dependend on gnome1. jack.kirstein@gmail.com 2006-11-11 20:27:24 0000 Yes, grip-3.3.x has no required dependencies on gnome1. The ebuild contains a dependency on libghttp:, ie gnome-base/libghttp but this is bogus - probably just leftovers from an ancient grip ebuild. Take out that dependency and grip builds fine - no gnome1 required. dberkholz@gentoo.org 2006-11-11 21:29:27 0000 I really need gnome-libs 1.x to stay for one of my scientific apps. Porting to GTK-2 is not an option to do in this time frame because it's in progress by upstream and it's a very complex application that interfaces with Guile libraries that only use GTK-1 as well. I don't mind accepting some of the maintenance burden for gnome-libs. gentoo@altkai.ml1.net 2006-11-13 11:27:16 0000 Hi, I have two corrections to the list: games-emulation/generator optionally depends on gtk1; I'll be submitting an ebuild to remove that app-emulation/vice-1.20 does not depend on gtk1 any longer. previous versions do pogosyan@phys.ualberta.ca 2006-11-13 12:13:12 0000 (In reply to comment #8) > I really need gnome-libs 1.x to stay for one of my scientific apps. Porting to > GTK-2 is not an option to do in this time frame because it's in progress by > upstream and it's a very complex application that interfaces with Guile > libraries that only use GTK-1 as well. > > I don't mind accepting some of the maintenance burden for gnome-libs. > You need gnome-libs 1.x or gtk1 ? Scientific application I use also use gtk1 and this library is a must for me have dberkholz@gentoo.org 2006-11-13 20:24:10 0000 sci-chemistry/coot uses x11-libs/gtk-canvas, which uses gnome-libs. pacho@condmat1.ciencias.uniovi.es 2006-11-14 02:29:09 0000 (In reply to comment #8) > I really need gnome-libs 1.x to stay for one of my scientific apps. Porting to > GTK-2 is not an option to do in this time frame because it's in progress by > upstream and it's a very complex application that interfaces with Guile > libraries that only use GTK-1 as well. > > I don't mind accepting some of the maintenance burden for gnome-libs. > Same problem here. I think that gtk1 can be in the tree without gnome 1.4 :-/ Thanks a lot jack.kirstein@gmail.com 2006-11-16 15:45:55 0000 Do you guys not read anything in this bug? Comment #7: Grip-3.3.x DOES NOT require gnome-1.4. The ebuild contains a bogus dependency on libghttp which is not required. And yet, it has been package.masked Go ahead, remove it. But doing so on reasoning that it is dependent on gnome 1.4 is BS jkeiren@gmail.com 2006-11-17 00:27:30 0000 (In reply to comment #7) > Yes, grip-3.3.x has no required dependencies on gnome1. The ebuild contains a > dependency on libghttp:, ie > gnome-base/libghttp > but this is bogus - probably just leftovers from an ancient grip ebuild. Take > out that dependency and grip builds fine - no gnome1 required. > I would for this reason strongly consider keeping grip in. In my opinion it's one of the better front-ends for ripping in a graphical environment, or does anyone have a pointer to a better front-end? jakub@gentoo.org 2006-11-17 02:37:48 0000 Folks, move the grip debate to Bug 155428 if you really can't resists. This is a tracker bug, not a grip one. jack.kirstein@gmail.com 2006-11-17 05:27:50 0000 This is also supposed to be a bug where one can dispute the gnome-1 package list. At least that is what we were being told: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-514782.html Quote: How to dispute the resolution: 1) You can comment on bug #154102 pacho@condmat1.ciencias.uniovi.es 2006-11-17 06:23:26 0000 Please, DON'T REMOVE grip from the tree. It doesn't depend on gnome-1.x and it works fine for me. Thanks jakub@gentoo.org 2006-11-17 07:01:36 0000 (In reply to comment #17) > Please, DON'T REMOVE grip from the tree. It doesn't depend on gnome-1.x and it > works fine for me. Which part of Comment #15 did you miss? :( jack.kirstein@gmail.com 2006-11-17 08:00:04 0000 (In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #17) > > Please, DON'T REMOVE grip from the tree. It doesn't depend on gnome-1.x and it > > works fine for me. > > Which part of Comment #15 did you miss? :( > What part of Comment #16 did you miss? dopey@moonteeth.com 2006-11-17 08:53:16 0000 In the future, can gentoo package maintainers please do the USE flag removal FIRST before starting to mask packages? I ask because I did an emerge sync and have quite a number of the packages in the USE flag removal section emerged with "gnome" useflag and without manually adding each of those packages into my package.use file, or removing "gnome" entirely from my USE flags I am now stuck with package masking errors when trying to update. I meant to make this comment on the bug a while ago, but I assumed that it just made sense and that's what would have happened. jakub@gentoo.org 2006-11-17 11:15:14 0000 (In reply to comment #20) > In the future, can gentoo package maintainers please do the USE flag removal > FIRST before starting to mask packages? Sure, we'd love to, if we had a working way to find them which doesn't take half day or more for one run. Many people spent hour of work checking for the dependencies and it went wrong because of a bug in a package that's used for these checks. And many people spent hours of their time late at night to fix the tool as fast as possible. Thanks for understanding. jakub@gentoo.org 2006-11-17 13:52:30 0000 *** Bug 155509 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** kparent@enersea.net 2006-11-17 14:32:52 0000 emerge -uDpv world resulted in masked package output for gdk-pixbuf. ======================================================================== These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating world dependencies / !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=media-libs/gdk-pixbuf-0.2.5" have been masked. !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request: - media-libs/gdk-pixbuf-0.22.0-r5 (masked by: package.mask) # Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd@gentoo.org> (16 Nov 2006) # GNOME 1.x Removal Mask (15 Dec 2006) For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook. (dependency required by "x11-themes/redhat-artwork-0.243-r1" [ebuild]) !!! Problem resolving dependencies for x11-themes/redhat-artwork !!! Depgraph creation failed. ============================================================================ AFAIK, gdk-pixbuf doesn't depend on gnome-1.x, and redhat-artwork is NOT masked. from the gdk-pixbuff-0.22.0 tarball README: ============================================================================= To install the gdk-pixbuf library, you will want to have the following libraries installed: libpng 1.0.3 ; ls -l /usr/lib/libpng.so.2.* http://www.cdrom.com/pub/png ftp://swrinde.nde.swri.edu/pub/png/src zlib 1.1.3 ; ls -l /usr/lib/libz.so.* http://www.cdrom.com/pub/infozip/zlib ftp://swrinde.nde.swri.edu/pub/png/src libjpeg v6b ; ls -l /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.6* http://www.ijg.org/ ftp://ftp.uu.net/graphics/jpeg/ libtiff v3.4 ; ls -l /usr/lib/libtiff.so.* http://www.sgi.com/fun/freeware/graphics.html ftp://ftp.sgi.com/graphics/tiff/ dopey@moonteeth.com 2006-11-17 16:58:32 0000 (In reply to comment #21) > (In reply to comment #20) > > In the future, can gentoo package maintainers please do the USE flag removal > > FIRST before starting to mask packages? > > Sure, we'd love to, if we had a working way to find them which doesn't take > half day or more for one run. Many people spent hour of work checking for the > dependencies and it went wrong because of a bug in a package that's used for > these checks. And many people spent hours of their time late at night to fix > the tool as fast as possible. Thanks for understanding. > I understand that not all packages are going to be caught. However, in this case, the document at http://compnerd.org/~compnerd/files/gnome-1.txt had a good chunk of the known ones listed when I first visited that URL over a week ago. I'm not trying to be an ass, but just suggesting that since these were known, why not take care of them ahead of time? cardoe@gentoo.org 2006-11-17 20:15:34 0000 Andy, we're all volunteers. We all contribute. If you knew about the issue before hand it was your responsibility to speak up and to contribute to the project which you clearly benefit from. You might not be trying to be an ass but you're sure coming across as one. dopey@moonteeth.com 2006-11-17 22:29:59 0000 (In reply to comment #25) > Andy, we're all volunteers. We all contribute. If you knew about the issue > before hand it was your responsibility to speak up and to contribute to the > project which you clearly benefit from. You might not be trying to be an ass > but you're sure coming across as one. > I'm not trying to get into a pissing match and if I appear to be starting one I apologize. This is my last word on this. I didn't know about the issue before hand because it didn't happen yet. I thought about it, and assumed that's how it would have been handled and didn't bother. Next time I will. But since I didn't, I wanted to make the suggestion for the next time something similar occurs. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. leio@gentoo.org 2006-11-25 09:14:51 0000 gnome-base/libghttp depends only on virtual/libc, as such I don't see a reason to remove this due to GNOME-1.x removal. Related to that: * media-sound/orpheus can remain in the tree in a way that it continues to support cddb (see bug 156193); * net-fs/intersync doesn't have to be removed due to GNOME-1.x removal; * dev-perl/HTTP-GHTTP could remain, but becomes superfluous once the older versions of dev-perl/AxKit (that dep on HTTP-GHTTP) are removed from the tree, so I don't see a point in keeping dev-perl/HTTP-GHTTP, given there there is CPAN. compnerd@gentoo.org 2006-11-28 22:05:33 0000 *** Bug 154202 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** pacho@condmat1.ciencias.uniovi.es 2006-12-10 04:40:35 0000 Please unmask mandrake-artwork: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156702 Thanks jakub@gentoo.org 2006-12-23 03:58:01 0000 /\ _`\ /\__ _\ /\ _`\ \ \ \L\ \ \/_/\ \/ \ \ \L\ \ \ \ , / \ \ \ \ \ ,__/ \ \ \\ \ __ \_\ \__ __\ \ \/ __ \ \_\ \_\/\_\/\_____\/\_\\ \_\/\_\ \/_/\/ /\/_/\/_____/\/_/ \/_/\/_/