Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 172062 - RFE: update libgsf to 1.13.2
Summary: RFE: update libgsf to 1.13.2
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: libgsf
Version: rawhide
Hardware: i386
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Caolan McNamara
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2005-10-30 11:39 UTC by Michael Wise
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version: 1.13.3-1
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-11-01 09:16:12 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Michael Wise 2005-10-30 11:39:42 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8b5) Gecko/20051008 Fedora/1.5-0.5.0.beta2 Firefox/1.4.1

Description of problem:
Would it be possible to update libgsf.  I am trying to comile gnucash2. It needs libgoffice and libgoffice-0.1 needs at least libgsf-1.13.1

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libgsf-1.12.3-1

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  

Additional info:
Comment 1 Caolan McNamara 2005-11-01 09:16:12 UTC 
Well the 1.13 series is technically "unstable", and I don't want to get into
supporting an unstable version. 1.12-3 was only released in september. I'm
reluctant to move to 1.13.
Comment 2 Hans de Goede 2005-11-25 13:55:58 UTC 
I would like to add a me too or +1 to this ticket, I would like to update
gnumeric in extras to 1.6 which needs libgoffice-0.1.x which needs libgsf >=
1.13.2 . Please reconcider.
Comment 3 Hans de Goede 2005-11-25 13:58:33 UTC 
As an alternative I might create a libgsf13 package, whot is you opinion on that?
Comment 4 Caolan McNamara 2005-11-25 14:08:57 UTC 
I'm not in favour of putting in a 1.13 under-development package until it's 1.14
as I don't need the pain of api changes right now for libwpd->OOo and whatever
else is lurking in the grass. A libgsf13 package sounds good
Comment 5 Hans de Goede 2005-11-26 22:41:37 UTC 
In the meantime I've made a special libgsf113 package for extras which can be
installed next to the core libgsf without any problems. See bug 174266 for the
extras review. I've also created a goffice package for extras, see Bug 174267
for the review.
Comment 6 Caolan McNamara 2005-12-02 20:15:18 UTC 
hmm, one of my more gung-ho co-workers has upgraded it anyway :-)
Comment 7 Hans de Goede 2005-12-05 12:57:35 UTC 
Hmm,

Could you add an Obsoletes libgsf113(-devel) to it so that it get rids of
libgsf113, this doesn't conflict but ldd on something linked to libgsf might get
the extra versions as that adds /usr/lib(64)/libgsf-1.13/lib to the ldpath.

I'll update goffice and gnumeric to build against the new in core package (not
set a special PKGCONFIG path and change requires).

Thanks,

Hans
Comment 8 Caolan McNamara 2005-12-05 13:06:21 UTC 
ok, done.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.