On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:27:05 -0700, Denis Leroy wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:14:10 -0400, Build System wrote:
>
>
>>New package libsigc++
>> The Typesafe Signal Framework for C++.
>
>
>>* Wed Oct 19 2005 Caolan McNamara <caolanm(a)redhat.com> 2.0.16-1
>>- the return of libsigc++
>>
>>* Wed Jan 09 2002 Tim Powers <timp(a)redhat.com>
>>- automated rebuild
>
>
> Ouch! :(
>
> Please note that it has been part of Fedora Extras for a long time.
> We don't ignore Fedora Extras, do we?
Yes, this is unfortunate. Also, it would not be a good idea to have
libsigc++ in core and gtkmm in extras. I think you really want the same
person to be maintaining those, and they need to be upgraded at the same
time.
Was there a specific reason to add it to core ?
-denis, sigC++/gtkmm extras maintainer
Adding to that, the package currently conflicts with libsigc++20 from
Extras since it upgrades the older one for the older API, which we've kept
as libsigc++.
It is based on an old package from Red Hat Linux, which has flaws. It owns
/usr/share/doc, contains libsigc-2.0.so in the wrong package, contains
duplicates of the %doc files from the main package in the -devel package,
should require pkgconfig in the -devel package, and moves the html docs to
a different directory.
A copy of the GPL ought to be included also in the Extras package, btw.