Summary: | x11-wm/compiz-0.9.2 version bump | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Ralf Mayer <gentooianer123> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Desktop-Effects herd <desktop-effects+disabled> |
Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | alessandro.capogna, bugsgentoo, denilsonsa |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Ralf Mayer
2010-11-15 13:53:14 UTC
The ebuilds for compiz-0.9.2 are already in the overlay. Even though I haven't hit many issues, other members of the team have hit continuous segmentation faults. It may or not be related to their use of GNOME, while I use KDE. So we won't move this release into the tree. Thanks for the response. Alright, so we've just to wait, until it's going to hit the MAIN-tree? :) Mhhh... I have no experience with gnome. I'm using KDE 4.6 (live), and compiz 0.9.2 works like a charm. I've just tested Compiz 0.9.2 from desktop-effects overlay. In summary: it still does not work. I don't use KDE. I don't use Gnome. I just run Compiz as window manager, Emerald as window decorator and nothing else. However, there is no 0.9.2 version of Emerald, and current 0.8.4-r2 version fails to compile against 0.9.2 compiz. And, finally, when I tried running compiz 0.9.2, it segfault soon after started. Sorry, I didn't have time to test it and generate a backtrace, so I went back to 0.8.x Compiz. (In reply to comment #3) > However, there is no 0.9.2 version of Emerald, and current 0.8.4-r2 version > fails to compile against 0.9.2 compiz. Actually, there is a patch that makes it compile. Look here: http://forum.compiz.org/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=14109 and here: http://git.compiz.org/fusion/decorators/emerald/commit/?h=compiz%2b%2b&id=81775d407f775bad1e6f6ba3345b891b66bb5faf I think this bug can be closed since new development release (0.9.4) is released and a bug for this bump is already opened https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=357831 Let's follow this on the other bug. |