[Bug 247402] Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Jul 23 17:55:46 UTC 2007
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GspiceUI - A GUI to freely available Spice Electronic circuit similators
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247402
------- Additional Comments From cgoorah at yahoo.com.au 2007-07-23 13:55 EST -------
Actually, Xavier and I are working on packaging the _latest_ gwave .
(gwave2-20070514) I repeat _latest_.
We are having difficulties and still struggling in rpmbuiling that latest
release since it requires many dependencies.
V buildrequires W
W buildrequires X
X buildrequires Y
Y buildrequires Z
We were able to build the previous release of gwave-20060606 which required
only guile-gtk and compat-guile-16.
http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/gwave/gwave.png
But, that gwave-20060606 can't be built on the latest guile-gtk-2. So we opted
for now, the 1.2 version of guile-gtk which is only available on the debian
repository.
We are now working to meet the dependencies of the latest gwave.
But I'm not in favour of doing so, since 2 or 3 dependencies are either keep
on changing names or being split.
In accordance to 2 fedora-geda users (to whom I talked), they would be happy
to have at least gwave-20060606 for their simulations.
Our work can be found here:
* http://laxathom.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/
* http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/gwave/ (my specs needs to be polished
and are met for testing functional use only)
So now, the question is:
are we willing to ship
*the latest gwave and at the same time shipping lots of old dependencies ?
or
*the gwave-2006006 and one dependency ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
More information about the package-review
mailing list