The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS 5.x RPM package from it?
On 05/01/2012 06:52 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS 5.x RPM package from it?
I would be happy to maintain a CentOS-5 RPM and put it in the CentOS Extras repository.
On 05/01/2012 06:52 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The Krita [1] mailing list is now discussing making a standalone .tgz package of the latest Krita for CentOS 5.x. After this tarball is created is there anyone interested in making and maintaining a CentOS 5.x RPM package from it?
The requirements include:
qt 4.6.0 or newer
======
CentOS-5 has qt4 version "4.2.1-1.el5_7.1" ... are you sure it will work?
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 17:14, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
I would be happy to maintain a CentOS-5 RPM and put it in the CentOS Extras repository.
Thank you Johnny! I will inform the Krita list now. Do you give your permission that I may pass your email address on to the person building the tarball?
The requirements include:
qt 4.6.0 or newer
======
CentOS-5 has qt4 version "4.2.1-1.el5_7.1" ... are you sure it will work?
The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball and linking against that. He is building it now.
On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball and linking against that. He is building it now.
erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are you sure this is a good idea ?
- KB
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:14, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball and linking against that. He is building it now.
erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are you sure this is a good idea ?
I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, such as AutoDesk support.
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:14, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 05/01/2012 05:07 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The guy building the tarball will be including Qt 4.6 in the tarball and linking against that. He is building it now.
erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are you sure this is a good idea ?
I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, such as AutoDesk support.
I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now.
A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, noting that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should only have bug and security fixes?
mark
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:53, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now.
A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, noting that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should only have bug and security fixes?
I am not sure what the newer Qt provides, but I know that many KDE technologies rely on the latest-greatest Qt at the time of the KDE release. Your knowledge and participation in the thread would be most valuable, especially in this early stage: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.krita/5503
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 19:53, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now.
A question: what new functionality does the newer library provide, noting that it's a subrelease, *not* the next release, and so should
only have
bug and security fixes?
I am not sure what the newer Qt provides, but I know that many KDE technologies rely on the latest-greatest Qt at the time of the KDE release. Your knowledge and participation in the thread would be most valuable, especially in this early stage: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.krita/5503
a) You do understand what I'm saying about subreleases vs. release? That there shouldn't be anything that new (as opposed to, say, python 10-12 years ago, where each subrelease broke everything)? I would strongly urge you to pass that question to the krista list. b) I'd love to do some programming again, but a day job and a life outside work (see (c)), I don't have time, and c) I most certainly will *NOT* be on the list next week, as I'm getting remarried Sat....
mark
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 20:17, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
a) You do understand what I'm saying about subreleases vs. release? That there shouldn't be anything that new (as opposed to, say, python 10-12 years ago, where each subrelease broke everything)? I would strongly urge you to pass that question to the krista list.
Yes, I understand. He is building against Qt 4.8 or thereabout, whereas CentOS 5.8 ships with Qt 3.x. I see these Qt 4.7 packages, but it is not clear to me that using them is what you are suggesting: http://joseph.freivald.com/linux/2011/09/23/qt-4-7-4-and-qt-creator-2-3-0-fo...
b) I'd love to do some programming again, but a day job and a life outside work (see (c)), I don't have time, and c) I most certainly will *NOT* be on the list next week, as I'm getting remarried Sat....
Congratulations! I hope that your new marriage turns out better than the first one.
-
Dotan Cohen -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
m.roth＠5-cent.us