GNOME-2.18.3

[Randy McMurchy]

Version increment to 2.16.3

​http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/platform/2.16/2.16.3/sources/ ​http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/desktop/2.16/2.16.3/sources/

[particlehunter]

Randy, shouldn't this be the time to begin introducing the language bindings for GNOME?

I mean... there's some packages like Inkscape that needs make use of the C/C++ language bindings but they aren't still included in the BLFS book and I think it could be a good time to include them, as their installation procedure is relatively straightforward and... it would be a nice thing to have

What do you think about this?

Julio

[dnicholson@…]

Mono will have to be added since Tomboy is now part of the GNOME desktop. I think it's Tomboy. One of the Mono apps.

[Randy McMurchy]

But wouldn't Tomboy be one of the "Additional" packages, and not a "Core" package? Either way, of course, once Tomboy is added to the book, yes, if Mono is a 'required' dep, then yeah it should probably go into the book.

I just wonder why it would be a required depend? I thought Mono was .net dev platform, why would GNOME require that?

[dnicholson@…]

Because people started writing a lot of cool apps in Mono. Stuff like Tomboy, Beagle and Banshee. I guess C# is just an easy programming language to learn and write powerful stuff with. Read this long debate on the GNOME desktop-devel-list on whether to include C# bindings:

​http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-July/msg00516.html

[particlehunter]

Maybe the best solution would be to implement all of them or, at least, the bare minimun, that's C++, Python and Mono (I don't personally like the last of them but if there are people wanting to use Tomboy or Quod Libet... I think it should be included).

But I also think it hasn't to be part of the GNOME core in the sense that, it could be added in the same way the 'additional X window system configuration' are shown, why not having a section like 'additional components for GNOME'? It would sound more sense put that way... as the bindings could be for 'fine-tuning' GNOME... not really necessary but an option to have...

Julio

[Randy McMurchy]

Version increment to 2.18.0 (due to be released on March 14, 2007

​http://www.gnome.org/

[Randy McMurchy]

Sigh....

Just ran into Gnome Games and gnome-python-desktop is required, which means it will need to be added to the book. It is a hassle too, note from my configure.log:

checking for LIBPANELAPPLET... yes checking for LIBGNOMEPRINT... yes checking for libgnomeprint 2.8 API... found checking for LIBGNOMEPRINTUI... yes checking for GTKSOURCEVIEW... yes checking for WNCK... yes checking for TOTEM_PLPARSER... yes checking for GTOP... yes checking for NAUTILUSBURN... yes checking for MEDIAPROFILES... yes checking for RSVG... yes checking for METACITY... yes checking for GNOMEKEYRING... yes checking for GNOMEDESKTOP... yes checking for bug-buddy... /opt/gnome/bin/bug-buddy

The configure.{ac,in} (whichever it is) lists all these deps and it is a mother. Lots of Deps.....

I think I'll move over to GnuCash, and get it updated (along with Guile) and then we can ditch the GNOME-1 stuff.

Here is the update status of GNOME-2.18.3:

There are only some of the "Utility" packages and all the "Accessibility" packages left to do. All the "Core" and all the "Additional Library" packages have been completed.

[DJ Lucas]

Increment 2.20.3

[Randy McMurchy]

I'd prefer if we left this ticket at 2.18.3 and made a new one for 2.20. There's still a couple of packages that need md5sums and stuff updated for the 2 18.3 release. My bad for not having it done already.

Incrementing this ticket implies that the previous update was done. I'd rather open a new one which may indicate the previous update is not finished.

[DJ Lucas]

Cool..that was another thing I wanted to suggest is that we drop the tiny version for the Chapter and prefix/sysconfdir. Too many packages, and too fast moving.

[Randy McMurchy]

All the GNOME packages currently in the book have been updated to reflect the 2.18.3 update. Note that there still may be a couple of new packages that the GNOME devs have added to a standard GNOME installation but have not yet been added to the book.

I'm going to close this ticket, and open a new one for the new GNOME version. I'll include in that ticket a reference to this ticket, as there are still many things annotated (wish list) that apply to the next update.