This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no longer exist in Fedora Core 5.
The current rawhide monolithic xorg-x11 build has had the virtual "Provides: XFree86-devel" removed to both find out what all packages were still using it, and also as a heads up to developers and package maintainers to update their packages, as this is no longer a valid BuildRequires.
All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or "BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for each library that is needed.
For example:
BuildRequires: libX11-devel BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel
etc..
When updating packages for rawhide, be sure to not use xorg-x11-devel either, because it only exists temporarily for a week or less. Once modular X goes into rawhide, packages depending on either of these dependencies will need to be updated in order to build properly, so it is best to make the change now if possible.
I'd like to thank everyone who has helped update packages so far, as this helps to minimize the amount of work needed later.
Thanks in advance!
P.S. This email has been sent to fedora-devel-list, however please feel free to forward this to other developmental mailing lists which I might not be subscribed to if you think the information is useful to a wider audience who might not read fedora-devel-list.
Would it be a bad idea to have an update for FC3 and FC4 of their current xorg-x11-devel with additional provides (libX11-devel, libXinerama-devel)? This would make it easier to recompile FC5 SRPMs on these older systems.
Charles Lopes wrote:
Would it be a bad idea to have an update for FC3 and FC4 of their current xorg-x11-devel with additional provides (libX11-devel, libXinerama-devel)? This would make it easier to recompile FC5 SRPMs on these older systems.
I plan on doing that in the next FC3/FC4 updates, but that will wait until there is a good enough reason to do another FC3/FC4 update. There are a few bug fixes and driver updates that could potentially be a part of that too. Current priorities are aligned with getting modular X into rawhide however, so an FC3/FC4 update isn't on the radar currently, but it will happen at some point.
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 08:30:04PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no longer exist in Fedora Core 5.
All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or "BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for each library that is needed.
For example:
BuildRequires: libX11-devel BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel
etc..
Is there a list for the new *-devel packages? It would make it easier to packagers to identify the missing BuildRequires, perhaps even by trial-and-error :)
Will the modular xorg-x11 packages be built from one spec file (the retrieving the *-devel is trivial) or several?
Axel Thimm wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 08:30:04PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no longer exist in Fedora Core 5.
All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or "BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for each library that is needed.
For example:
BuildRequires: libX11-devel BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel
etc..
Is there a list for the new *-devel packages? It would make it easier to packagers to identify the missing BuildRequires, perhaps even by trial-and-error :)
Yep, please visit the FC5 X.Org modularization page at:
http://mharris.ca/xorg-modular/xorg-modularization.html
It has hyperlinks to the ftp directory in which you can download the src and binary rpms that have been built so far, as well as links to 4 text files which document the order in which everything needs to be built. The xorg-all-libs.txt file contains a list of all of the modular X library package names, of which each has a -devel subpackage.
In general, if an application links to libXfoo, then you just need to put "BuildRequires: libXfoo-devel" for each X library it uses.
The one exception, is the screensaver library. It is the only package out of 40 libraries, in which the name of the package and the name of the library are not the same. The library is libXss, and the package name is libXScrnSaver. Yes this is silly, but it is how upstream X.Org decided to name things.
Will the modular xorg-x11 packages be built from one spec file (the retrieving the *-devel is trivial) or several?
If it was all in one spec file, then it wouldn't be "modular".