Fedora Desktop on XO
cjb at laptop.org
Tue Jan 6 20:28:25 EST 2009
> Good news. I'm aware of the conflicts you mention. I'm not sure
> that we need evince-dvi (not sure if its a requirement of anything
> though and hence gets pulled in automatically).
That's right, we don't need it. It's part of the groupinstall, but it's
not depended on otherwise (and was split out so that people could choose
to omit it).
> For the evince vs sugar-evince I suspect we need to try and get the
> mainline evince split out into evince and evince-libs so that we
> can build sugar-evince against it similar to what we do with
> abiword and write (I think that's its name).
Yep, sounds good.
> As for the gconf2-dbus...... I know that's used over the usual dbus
> to drop out the bonobo dependencies but whether that is still a
> factor at the moment with the other things that pull bonobo in I'm
> not sure so it might be worthwhile working out whether we stick
> with it or move back to the mainline version. Not sure who knows
> the answer to that one, I know DSD got it compiled up but other
> than that I don't know the best person to ask.
I think the reason we're using GConf2-dbus is actually that plain GConf2
didn't work with Rainbow's preforking code after the move to F10, but
we've reverted that preforking code for the moment, so perhaps we could
just use plain GConf2..
Chris Ball <cjb at laptop.org>
More information about the Devel