Subject: Re: kde 2.2 were coming soon?
From: Dan Burcaw (dburcaw@terraplex.com)
Date: Thu Aug 23 2001 - 16:02:16 MDT
On Thursday 23 August 2001 12:57, you wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> I have been on both ftp.kde.org and some of the mirror sites and can not
> find the YDL2 KDE 2.2 srpms and rpms anyplace that you hinted might be
> coming soon?
>
> Are these still coming?
Yes. I'm having problems with the packaging of kdebase.
I'm finding that 'grep -v' doesn't seem to work as advertised.
cat $RPM_BUILD_DIR/file.list.%{name} |grep -v '/bin/kdesud$' |grep -v '/
bin/kcheckpass$' |grep -v '/usr/share/config' |grep -v '/etc' |grep -v
'/usr/bin
$' |grep -v '/usr/lib$' |grep -v '/usr/share$' |grep -v '/usr$' |grep -v
'/usr/s
bin$' |grep -v '/usr/share$' |grep -v '/usr/bin/konsole_grantpty$' |grep -v
'/us
r/include' |grep -v '/usr/X11R6/lib$' |grep -v '/usr/X11R6$' |grep -v
'libccont\
.a' >$RPM_BUILD_DIR/file.list.%{name}.tmp
mv -f $RPM_BUILD_DIR/file.list.%{name}.tmp $RPM_BUILD_DIR/file.list.%{na
That particular part of the spec file is not working properly.
I get duplicate entry packaging errors when %files is processing.
Any help on this would be appreciated :)
Franz Sirl has this built on a 2.0 box upgraded to latest rawhide
stuff, but I don't want to upgrade our development environment
just to release 2.2 KDE rpms.
> That brings up a another point? Is YDL planning to have any particular
> "contributed" archive for SRPMS and RPMS that people build and
> contribute.
There is a contrib/ direcetory right now.
I need to talk to our main mirrors about how to facilitate uploading.
> The reason I ask is that there are a lot of new things coming down the
> pike (or already here).
>
> - kde 2.2
> - glibc 2.2.4 and fast after glibc-2.2.5 (compatible with gcc -3.X)
> - gcc 3.0.1 has already been released
> - Openoffice 638 will probably be released by next week
> - JDK 1.3.1 may follow along soon if it passes the JCK tests
> - new kernels
> - mozilla 0.9.3 and mozilla 0.9.4 (targeted for mid Sept?)
> -etc
>
> If you had a "contributed section" (possibly with a limited number of
> "trusted" developers able to contribute) it would certainly help take
> the load off
> of your shoulders.
>
> Also given the glibc-2.2.4 versioned symbols and gcc 3 C++ abi breakage,
> having a contrib section split into a glibc-2.2.1/gcc-2.95.4 for users
> of YDL 2.0 versus a glibc-2.2.5/gcc3.X for something like YDL 2.1 might
> be useful.
Sounds good. Let's talk about this more once I find out about uploading, etc.
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Kevin
--Regards, Dan Burcaw Terra Soft Solutions, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 15:03:53 MDT