kevin at scrye.com
Mon Dec 5 22:25:07 UTC 2011
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 23:17:02 +0000
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Eric Smith <eric at brouhaha.com> wrote:
> > Kevin Fenzi wrote about gdk-pixbuf:
> > > It failed the mass rebuild, not much left that depends on it, and
> > > nothing I need. ;)
> > [...]
> >> So, if anyone really really really wants to keep it alive, feel
> >> free to take it and fix it so it builds and works. ;)
> > I use gdk-pixbuf in an application that is used on Fedora but for
> > licensing reasons can't currently be submitted as a Fedora package.
> > I'd hate to see gdk-pixbuf go away, as I don't know what I could
> > use to replace it. I've never looked at building gdk-pixbuf
> > myself, and have never been able to wrap my head around autotools,
> > so if the cause of the FTBFS isn't obvious, I doubt that I can fix
> > it quickly. I'm not going to commit to taking maintainership of
> > the package right now, but if nobody else does and I find the time
> > to deal with it, perhaps I will in the future.
> > As far as I can tell, gdk-pixbuf hasn't been deprecated upstream;
> > there was a new release in August. Has anyone notified upstream
> > about the FTBFS?
> Are you sure your not referring to gdk-pixbuf2?
I really suspect so.
the gdk-pixbuf package is the gtk+ one in fedora.
it's last release was december 2002.
yes, thats right, almost exactly 9 years ago. ;)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111205/9025d69e/attachment.bin
More information about the devel