On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 11:40:07PM +0100, Dave Beckett wrote: > Sven Luther wrote: > > On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 03:50:31AM +0200, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote: > >> You're right: GTK 2.8.17 requires only cairo >= 0.9.2, but DFB backend > >> became officially part of cairo starting from version 1.1.2 (first > >> official release of 1.1.x series). > >> The only reasonable option i see to updating official cairo to >= 1.1.2 > >> in unstable is maintaining custom 1.1.6 source package with DFB backed > >> enabled, until cairo 1.1.x enters unstable. > > > > I read the cairo changelog yesterday, and i couldn't see any risk of > > instability, only more stabilty, but i am no expert. Do we have feedback > > from > > the cairo maintainer on this, or from the gnome people ? Mike, do you have > > an > > opinion on cairoa 1.0.4 vs cairo 1.1.x ? > > As the cairo maintainer... the state of 1.1.x in git is pretty good, but > 1.2.0 is a major release which should be the one in etch. It'll be needed
Ok, this respond to one of the questions in my other mail. 1.2.0 should be in etch. > for other major packages such as firefox2 (later) and I guess other rdepends > such as gtk, mono and gcj/classpath will update to use the new APIs there > sometime. > > So for now, I'd package an experimental 1.1.x and later an 1.2.0 in unstable. Well, if we are gonna go with gtk-dfb 2.8 (much preferable over the current situation which uses gtk 2.0), we need a 1.1.x version of cairo, using only the directfb backend in unstable/testing, at least until 1.2.0 can enter unstable/testing. I guess we could help you maintain such a package if you feel it is too much work for you or something such. Thanks for your answers, Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
