[arch-dev-public] libotr-4.0.0-1 in [staging]
libotr-4.0.0-1 is in [staging] since september 4th. Is there a technical difficulty thatprevents to complete this rebuild [1] or it was simply forgotten? Stéphane [1] https://www.archlinux.org/todo/182/
[2012-10-16 09:38:24 -0400] Stéphane Gaudreault:
libotr-4.0.0-1 is in [staging] since september 4th. Is there a technical difficulty thatprevents to complete this rebuild
Yes. They've completely revamped the API, and no application (except pidgin-otr, developed by the same people) has been ported yet. It doesn't look to me like a trivial matter to port existing code to the new interface (something I did not realize when I created the TODO). So if you want to clean up [staging], I guess the best would be to just kill that TODO list. -- Gaetan
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:51:13AM +1100, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
[2012-10-16 09:38:24 -0400] Stéphane Gaudreault:
libotr-4.0.0-1 is in [staging] since september 4th. Is there a technical difficulty thatprevents to complete this rebuild
Yes. They've completely revamped the API, and no application (except pidgin-otr, developed by the same people) has been ported yet. It doesn't look to me like a trivial matter to port existing code to the new interface (something I did not realize when I created the TODO).
So if you want to clean up [staging], I guess the best would be to just kill that TODO list.
An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold libpurple/pidgin back). d
Am Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0400 schrieb Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>:
An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold libpurple/pidgin back).
Sounds good to me in this special case. We should do something to cleanup staging. -Andy
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0400 schrieb Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>:
An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold libpurple/pidgin back).
Sounds good to me in this special case. We should do something to cleanup staging.
-Andy
I started working on a libotr3 package. I'll rename/move things around so it doesn't conflict with libotr. Hopefully, packages will build against it with minor patching. I'll test that before pushing it to staging. It should be ready tomorrow. I'll let you know when it'll be done. Eric
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0400 schrieb Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>:
An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold libpurple/pidgin back).
Sounds good to me in this special case. We should do something to cleanup staging.
-Andy
I started working on a libotr3 package. I'll rename/move things around so it doesn't conflict with libotr. Hopefully, packages will build against it with minor patching. I'll test that before pushing it to staging. It should be ready tomorrow. I'll let you know when it'll be done.
Eric
Hi, It took longer than I tough but there is now a libotr3 package in staging. The major changes that afffects building against it is: - the headers moved from /usr/include/libotr/ to /usr/include/libotr3/ - the library was renamed from libotr.so to libotr3.so As a test, I tried rebuilding bitlbee against it and I only had to add 2 small sed lines to make it work. We can now finish this todo list.
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:42:40PM -0400, Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0400 schrieb Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>:
An an alternative, we could introduce libotr3 and do a rebuild for the applications which haven't been ported (as to not hold libpurple/pidgin back).
Sounds good to me in this special case. We should do something to cleanup staging.
-Andy
I started working on a libotr3 package. I'll rename/move things around so it doesn't conflict with libotr. Hopefully, packages will build against it with minor patching. I'll test that before pushing it to staging. It should be ready tomorrow. I'll let you know when it'll be done.
Eric
Hi,
It took longer than I tough but there is now a libotr3 package in staging. The major changes that afffects building against it is:
- the headers moved from /usr/include/libotr/ to /usr/include/libotr3/ - the library was renamed from libotr.so to libotr3.so
Sounds reasonable.
As a test, I tried rebuilding bitlbee against it and I only had to add 2 small sed lines to make it work. We can now finish this todo list.
Great! Thanks for doing this. d
participants (5)
-
Andreas Radke
-
Dave Reisner
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Gaetan Bisson
-
Stéphane Gaudreault