Summary: | Stabilise =media-libs/libwmf-0.2.8.4-r4 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Tomáš Chvátal (RETIRED) <scarabeus> |
Component: | [OLD] Keywording and Stabilization | Assignee: | No maintainer - Look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers if you want to take care of it <maintainer-needed> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | Keywords: | STABLEREQ |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Tomáš Chvátal (RETIRED)
2011-07-03 10:46:16 UTC
amd64 ok (In reply to comment #0) > As per summary please stabilise media-libs/libwmf-0.2.8.4-r4. > > I know it is in the tree only for few days but it fixed the pixbuf issues it > was causing even in the stable tree, so it is worth to have it stable asap. > > (No idea how to test it, for me it is just one dependency on calibre) > > Thanks How about testing stable calibre against this version of libwmf? Is there an easy way to test the libwmf functionality on calibre? (In reply to comment #2) > How about testing stable calibre against this version of libwmf? Is there an > easy way to test the libwmf functionality on calibre? There is no stable calibre :) But quite few stable packages have wmf useflag :) I really have no clue how to test it apart from linking/compilation testing. emerges without issue Tested on amd64: emerges with no error. seems good on amd64 after some testing. Thanks guys I'm getting the following with the new ebuild: !!! The ebuild selected to satisfy ">=media-libs/libwmf-0.2.8" has unmet requirements. - media-libs/libwmf-0.2.8.4-r4::gentoo USE="X (consolekit) expat (multilib) (policykit) xml -debug -doc" The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: xml? ( !expat ) expat? ( !xml ) (dependency required by "media-gfx/imagemagick-6.6.5.6[wmf]" [installed]) (dependency required by "@selected" [set]) (dependency required by "@world" [argument]) Why is there such a construct? I have no idea if I should choose expat or xml, can't the ebuild just pick "better" as default if both use-flags are enabled? (In reply to comment #7) > The following REQUIRED_USE flag constraints are unsatisfied: > xml? ( !expat ) expat? ( !xml ) > > Why is there such a construct? I have no idea if I should choose expat or xml, > can't the ebuild just pick "better" as default if both use-flags are enabled? Initially, an another condition was there, but it was changed to this cause: - it makes deps cleaner - libwmf can be built with no xml support - libwmf has no real maintainer, so nobody can arbitrarily pick either expat or libxml2 as a "better" default (and given general upstream status of libwmf I don't think there's really a difference) arm stable Builds fine on x86. Rdeps build fine as well. Please mark stable for x86. x86 stable, thanks Myckel alpha/ia64/s390/sh/sparc stable ppc/ppc64 stable Stable for HPPA and closing. |