On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid@dillo.org> wrote:
Hi Michal,
Hola Jorge,
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 03:11:44PM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Kelson Vibber<kelson@pobox.com> wrote:
Michal Nowak wrote:
I'd like to create Fedora RPM's (since I am Fedora packager), the problem is that fltk2 is not in Fedora (Package Review's pending [1], help welcomed), so, only unofficial packages are doable now.
Problem with Fedora 11 is that fltk2 can't be built with recent g++ [2]. I might check with with F-10, it used to work.
I've just built FLTK2 r6786 and Dillo 2.1 on a Fedora 10 system, so it does work there.
?It's ?good ?to ?see ?you're ?already ?coordinating with Kelson, because that's exactly what I was to suggest.
In http://fltk.org/str.php?L2205 I was suggested to make a code change in FLTK2, I did so and it compiles fine now. I am not sure of the root cause because fltk guys suggested that the problem is glibc-2.10 and pointed to patch but the patch looks to be incorporated in F-11 glibc.
?FLTK2 is giving some confusion even to FLTK developers: http://fltk.org/newsgroups.php?s6818+gfltk.development+T1 ("pre-release thread").
Yes. While I did not read the license yet, if Debian feels the fltk2 one is problematic, Fedora legal will feel probably the same (aka blocker).
?In a nutshell (from my point of view):
? * fltk2 is not officially released, and maybe never will. ? * dillo2 uses fltk2, and this creates pressure to package it. ? * Distros have a policy against statically-linked binaries.
Definitely agree. The first and the second one can be somehow sorted out and fltk2 pushed to distribution, the last one is blocker.
? * We can provide unofficial statically-linked packages until ? ? the distro provides a shared fltk2 lib.
That's of course possible and doable but pita anyway. We can't ever make package for every distro out there, that's obvious.
?So, I'd suggest to package a statically-linked binary until the shared ?fltk2 ?is ?available from the distro. Once this happen we can provide a dynamic one.
I can do F-11 builds if needed.
?This ?avoids ?having to sort out the patching/adjusting problem of packaging a shared library, which is best solved by the distro itself.
?Now, ?it looks like you are the Fedora distro developer working on ?both ?fltk2 ?and ?dillo2, ?so in this case you can decide and suggest what looks best from your point of view.
I'm behind fltk2 in Fedora, Dillo is maintained by someone else but is prepared for bump to Dillo-2 (there's bugzilla for this) when is fltk2 in place...
?From ?a user perspective, it looks simpler to download a single binary ?and ?install it. If the shared way is decided, we need to provide nutshell directions.
I believe the simplest way for user how to get distro conforming packages is via distribution repositories (+ receives security, in-between-release problems solving, not necessary to check third party websites, etc). You greatly outlined the problems with having Dillo-2 in distribution; the problem is FLTK2. While watching at "changes" in FLTK2 snapshots I can't thing that the development is stalled or even stopped. I understand that my proposal won't be popular but switching from FLTK2 is necessary - we hardly have FLTK2 in distributions (read: no Dillo-2 in distribution) and that's shortening our user base. How hard it would be to rewrite/port Dillo-2 to FLTK-1.3? (I see that the speed of v1.3 development is nothing exciting, but from what I read months ago they at least plan to have a release ever.) While looking at the devel cycle of Dillo - two releases per year - I believe this porting should be mid-term goal. Unless we wanna spend another year out of mainstream distributions. (And frankly: even with Dillo-2 based on FLTK-1.3 we are quite far from Dillo-2 in distribution...)
?In ?the ?Debian ?case, I assume a statically linked deb will be produced (until the license problem is solved).
?Comments?
-- ?Cheers ?Jorge.-
_______________________________________________ Dillo-dev mailing list Dillo-dev@dillo.org http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev