Re: IBus 1.5

At Wed, 19 Dec 2012 02:30:20 +0900,
Fuminobu TAKEYAMA wrote:
> 
>  > 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

It looks like he removed dconf support in that SR.  So, dconf update
can be dropped as well, right?

The rest, gtk-update-icon-cache and glib-compile-schemas would be
still needed, though.


thanks,

Takashi

> 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]