Re: Dependencies

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 07:45:15PM +0100 or thereabouts, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:29:28PM +0000, Dave Malcolm wrote:
> > Some questions:  
> > - What versions of these packages have you got installed?  
> > - Are you building Conglomerate on top of the GNOME that came with your
> > distribution, or on top of a locally-built version of some kind?
> > - What's in the various versions of Debian?
> Sorry, still didn't find a conclusive answer. [1]
[...]
> > - What's other distributions are you using, and what versions of GNOME
> > do they use?

The collected wisdom (disclaimer: hyperbole may apply) of #gnome:

Debian stable has GNOME 1.4
Debian testing has a mixture of 1.4 and 2.2
RH 9.0 has GNOME 2.2
SuSE 9.0 has GNOME 2.2 
Fedora Core 1 has GNOME 2.4
Gentoo has GNOME 2.4
Mandrake 9.2 has GNOME 2.4
Debian sid has GNOME 2.4

Not sure about how Ximian Desktop 2 affects any of those. But
effectively, the latest version of any i386-based Linux distro 
other than SuSE has 2.4: but _only_ the latest version of that 
distro. (I say that carefully, because I dunno about FreeBSD
or Solaris, and someone said that YellowDog had something older.
And this only works if you count Fedora Core 1 as the latest version
of RH, too.) So your next question is, "How many people sit on 
ageing versions because they work fine for them?" :) 

> > - Can we can get away with GNOME 2.2?  

Looks entirely plausible. 2.4, though...Depends how many people
really do upgrade immediately.

Also, I confidently expect people to say "No, no, that's wrong"
for half of those. 

Telsa