Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 218077 - gnome-base/gnome-mount - bump request for 0.8
Summary: gnome-base/gnome-mount - bump request for 0.8
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High enhancement with 1 vote (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team
URL: http://hal.freedesktop.org/releases/
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on: 214801
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2008-04-17 10:19 UTC by Hubert Kowalski
Modified: 2008-11-27 22:12 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
Patch to add gnome-mount-0.8 to portage (gnome-mount-0.8.patch,3.71 KB, patch)
2008-08-05 11:54 UTC, Peter Sääf
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Hubert Kowalski 2008-04-17 10:19:45 UTC
Recently, gnome-mount was released. Can we have a new version in portage?
Comment 1 Doug Goldstein (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-04-17 13:04:26 UTC
Maintainer are aware of releases since some maintainers are involved in upstream. You filed this bump request a few hours after the actual release, the time period was while the maintainers were asleep. 0-day bump requests only serve to annoy.
Comment 2 Hubert Kowalski 2008-04-23 20:36:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
Oh, I am very sorry, i didn't look at the date. Please excuse me, I usually wait about 6-10 days before asking for bump or something similar.

Comment 3 Joe 2008-08-04 22:54:43 UTC
Well, Doug, zero day bugs might be annoying, but it doesn't look like having waited for two weeks would have changed anything...

Comment 4 Rémi Cardona (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-05 09:46:35 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, Doug, zero day bugs might be annoying, but it doesn't look like having
> waited for two weeks would have changed anything...

And a condescending tone will do nothing but to further annoy maintainers...

1) "Any updates on this?" is more than enough to gently remind us.
2) Have you actually _tried_ bumping 0.8 locally? Does it work? If so, please let us know, it will actually _help_ us.

No thanks for you
Comment 5 Peter Sääf 2008-08-05 11:18:32 UTC
I have been running this locally since it was released.
The ebuild can be reused with some dependency changes.

The libgnomeui dependency has been dropped.
New deps are >=dev-libs/glib-2.15 and if the nautilus extension is being built also >=gnome-base/nautilus-2.21.2
Comment 6 Rémi Cardona (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-08-05 11:42:51 UTC
Do you mind posting a diff of your ebuild against the lasted in portage? Thanks :)
Comment 7 Peter Sääf 2008-08-05 11:54:28 UTC
Created attachment 162262 [details, diff]
Patch to add gnome-mount-0.8 to portage

Patch to add gnome-mount-0.8 to portage
Comment 8 Joe 2008-08-05 17:51:14 UTC
I did a copy -0.7 to -0.8, ebuilded the digest and emerged it.
Everything seems to work fine.
Comment 9 Christoph Brill (egore) (RESIGNED) 2008-09-07 08:42:03 UTC
This bug needs to depend on bug 214801.
Comment 10 Jürgen Geuter 2008-11-19 08:33:17 UTC
gnome-mount-0.6 cannot properly unmount my ipod with the current ~amd64 GNOME (I get "there's probably no media in the device"). Bumping the ebuild locally to gnome-mount-0.8 fixed that issue and brought no problem with it.
Comment 11 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2008-11-19 17:59:51 UTC
I am also using it since days without policykit, are you sure this depends on 214801 ?
Comment 12 Gilles Dartiguelongue (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-11-19 18:04:16 UTC
alright guys, please stop commenting, we got your point and will look into it whenever we have time. As you may have noticed, gnome herd is a bit slow these days because we are all busy with real life.

I'll try to dig this when I finished moving the rest of the gnome 2.24 packages anyway.
Comment 13 Gilles Dartiguelongue (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2008-11-27 22:12:59 UTC
bumped in portage. gnome-mount actually uses policykit/pk-gnome but through dbus interface and with graceful fallback in case it is not registred on the bus.

pk is only needed to get priviledge when needed which wasn't previously possible anyway so there is no regression here. A ewarn could be a good idea though for guys using pk but for now I'd say it ok as it is.

Closing and thanks for all the comments.