gnome-pilot patches need applying

[Alex Lancaster]

>>>>> "NM" == Nigel Metheringham  writes:

NM> Palm support seems to be especially cursed in FC4.  There are some
NM> really low level problems - something that appears to be
NM> kernel/udev/hotplug (or quite likely a timing related bug in that
NM> set) that prevents even the command line pilot-xfer tools working
NM> in many cases (which completely destroys the possibility of
NM> gnome-pilot working).

NM> Then gnome-pilot has a batch of bugs including timing related on
NM> ttyUSB, broken API wrt to pilot-link (which it links to), broken
NM> conduits and broken evolution integration.

NM> Someone really really doesn't like this stuff :-/

I downgraded to using pilot-link-0.11.8 on FC4 for this reason (I
don't even try gnome-pilot let alone evolution integration), and seems
to be working OK.  I'll file some bugs on bugzilla.redhat.com on the
current pilot-link-0.12.0-0.pre3.0.fc4.1 included in FC4 when I get
time.  Interestingly, the pilot-link maintainer, David Desrosiers, has
specifically admonished distributions not to include any of pilot-link
0.12 pre-test versions and wait until the official 0.12.0 release:

See the first announcement of pilot-link-0.12-pre1:

 http://www.pilot-link.org/node/129

and a recent posting here:

 http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-pilot-list/2005-June/msg00011.html

I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge, but is it wise to
include a version in the distro that it's maintainer specifically
suggests not to?  I'm curious to know the reasoning behind including
this version in FC4.

Alex