Re: IBus 1.5

 > Thanks.  So, after removing it, we can just do "zypper dup" with
 > M17N:Devel for testing the new ibus, right?

I removed it.

Then, I could not add %posttrans to the spec file since hillwood's
change contains %posttrans.
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/145762


Fuminobu TAKEYAMA

(2012/12/19 1:05), Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:44:31 +0900,
> Fuminobu TAKEYAMA wrote:
>>
>> (2012/12/18 16:35), Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>> Hm, does anyone already test coverage of all M17N packages with ibus
>>> upgrade?  This is the first step as a migration, then we follow the
>>> functional test of the upgraded project.
>>
>> At least, hillwood and I have installed the ibus packages and
>> been testing them to check whether they work as we expected.
>
> That's good to hear.
>
> What I meant as build test is to simply test the builds of all
> (ibus-related) packages in a single project, e.g. M17N:Devel.
> It's a simple systematic test, just to make sure that it doesn't break
> any others.  This could be done in M17N as well, if M17N isn't
> supposed to be a "stable" repo...
>
>>> What's the actual breakage with M17N:Devel?  I see freetype2 update,
>>> scim and fcitx updates.  If any package updates in M17N:Devel aren't
>>> considered to be submitted to M17N at any time, such updates shouldn't
>>> be included in M17N:Devel as well.
>>
>> Sorry, I put freetype2 git snapshot there. It should be removed.
>
> Thanks.  So, after removing it, we can just do "zypper dup" with
> M17N:Devel for testing the new ibus, right?
>
>
>
> Takashi
>
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [email protected]