Plans for GTK+

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Plans for GTK+

Josselin Mouette
There are some news about GTK+ packages, and this relates to both GNOME
and the debian-installer. I'll try to sum them up here. Please note that
this is only a proposal, which is meant to be discussed.

I. The past

Until now, the graphical installer has been using a specially patched
GTK+ version, built on top of version 2.0.9, so that it can use DirectFB
as a backend. This had two major drawbacks: the debian-installer team
had to handle them without knowing much about GTK+ packaging, and the
version was completely outdated.

II. The present

The DirectFB backend has finally been integrated upstream into GTK+, in
the 2.9 development branch. However, the GNOME team is very reluctant to
package a development branch in unstable. Furthermore, GTK+ 2.9/2.10
introduces an ABI break which makes it binary-incompatible with theme
engines and IM modules, and source-incompatible with libgnomeui < 2.15.

Following a decision that happened around Debconf, Attilio Fiandrotti
and Eddy Petrişor have produced a patch that backports DirectFB supports
into GTK+ 2.8.18 (the current version in unstable) without affecting the
X11 build at all. It still requires libcairo 1.1 which is also a
development version. I have integrated this patch into GTK+ packages and
Eddy then produced a working graphical d-i image.

Tonight, those libcairo and gtk+2.0 packages are entering experimental.

III. The future

From now on, the d-i team will be able to work on the installer, basing
their work on these experimental packages. However this is not enough to
produce a release.

In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be released.
I hope this will allow to move the cairo udebs to unstable soon. Then,
synchronizing with the d-i team because it breaks former g-i packages,
we'll move the GTK+ udebs to unstable.

Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
DirectFB support. At that moment, we will upload it to experimental,
together with gtk2-engines 2.9/2.10 and libgnomeui 2.15. This will also
be the time for IM modules packages to be rebuilt.

IV. The release

After that, we will follow how GNOME 2.16 (which is due to be released
in september) goes, and we will have several options depending on it.
     1. Release with GTK+ 2.8. I'm not very happy with it as it will be
        already outdated at the time of the release. Sébastien Bacher
        (GTK+ maintainer) isn't happy with it either as we will not have
        upstream support for the DirectFB part.
     2. Release with GTK+ 2.10 and some parts of GNOME 2.16 (at least
        the library stack up to libgnomeui).
     3. Try to push most of GNOME 2.16 into etch. This is the best
        option but it requires a lot of work from the GNOME team, and
        also some from the buildd maintainers and FTP masters. Hopefully
        the situation will be better than that of GNOME 2.14 because we
        don't change the gstreamer version.

Comments, anyone?
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Eddy Petrișor
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Following a decision that happened around Debconf, Attilio Fiandrotti
> and Eddy Petrişor have produced a patch that backports DirectFB supports
> into GTK+ 2.8.18 (the current version in unstable) without affecting the
> X11 build at all. It still requires libcairo 1.1 which is also a
> development version. I have integrated this patch into GTK+ packages and
> Eddy then produced a working graphical d-i image.

I think is fair to say that Davide Viti has contributed a lot to this (he adapted the patch for the upstream part, and he build an image for i386, before me ;).

> Tonight, those libcairo and gtk+2.0 packages are entering experimental.

Excellent!

> After that, we will follow how GNOME 2.16 (which is due to be released
> in september) goes, and we will have several options depending on it.
>      1. Release with GTK+ 2.8. I'm not very happy with it as it will be
>         already outdated at the time of the release. Sébastien Bacher
>         (GTK+ maintainer) isn't happy with it either as we will not have
>         upstream support for the DirectFB part.

Probably Mike will help us with that, as he did until now, if we ask him ;-).

- --
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEpWAzY8Chqv3NRNoRAtMQAKCiFPXS7LxD7d2m44hwtdSNbWEg+wCgqV4k
DCANDH6aAOMFj7HjMWr/1jU=
=9xjt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Frans Pop-3
In reply to this post by Josselin Mouette
On Friday 30 June 2006 19:21, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> From now on, the d-i team will be able to work on the installer, basing
> their work on these experimental packages. However this is not enough
> to produce a release.
>
> In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be released.
> I hope this will allow to move the cairo udebs to unstable soon. Then,
> synchronizing with the d-i team because it breaks former g-i packages,
> we'll move the GTK+ udebs to unstable.

For Debian Installer the plan outlined by Josselin is perfect. It provides
us with current libraries and the possibility to polish the graphical
version of the installer in the run-up to the Etch freeze.
It also makes sure that we can get rid of the current "hacked" packages
before the Etch release.

It also makes us independent of the final decision by the Gnome/GTK
maintainers to stay with GTK+ 2.8 or go for 2.10. We will be happy and
ready to follow any decision made with regards to that.

On behalf of the g-i developers and all the people who need a graphical
installer to be able to install Debian in their own language, I'd like to
thank Dave Beckett and Josselin Mouette for making this possible for us.

Cheers,
FJP

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Andreas Barth
* Frans Pop ([hidden email]) [060630 20:06]:

> On Friday 30 June 2006 19:21, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > From now on, the d-i team will be able to work on the installer, basing
> > their work on these experimental packages. However this is not enough
> > to produce a release.
> >
> > In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be released.
> > I hope this will allow to move the cairo udebs to unstable soon. Then,
> > synchronizing with the d-i team because it breaks former g-i packages,
> > we'll move the GTK+ udebs to unstable.
>
> For Debian Installer the plan outlined by Josselin is perfect. It provides
> us with current libraries and the possibility to polish the graphical
> version of the installer in the run-up to the Etch freeze.
> It also makes sure that we can get rid of the current "hacked" packages
> before the Etch release.
>
> It also makes us independent of the final decision by the Gnome/GTK
> maintainers to stay with GTK+ 2.8 or go for 2.10. We will be happy and
> ready to follow any decision made with regards to that.
>
> On behalf of the g-i developers and all the people who need a graphical
> installer to be able to install Debian in their own language, I'd like to
> thank Dave Beckett and Josselin Mouette for making this possible for us.

For the release team, basically two conditions are necessary:
- The installer team is happy (and is not going to move the release
  version of d-i for etch to July 07 or so :),
- The dependend applications are not broken by that (this especially
  means no hasted uploads of gnome or whatever to unstable; staging in
  experimental is of course always ok).

In other words, as of now, the plan looks good, but we might want to
revisit it when it comes nearer to uploading the next new gnome version.


Cheers,
Andi
--
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Ondřej Surý-4
In reply to this post by Josselin Mouette
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 19:21 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> DirectFB support. At that moment, we will upload it to experimental,
> together with gtk2-engines 2.9/2.10 and libgnomeui 2.15. This will also
> be the time for IM modules packages to be rebuilt.

Can we possibly backport changes needed to support gtk2.10 into
libgnomeui 2.14.x?

Ondrej.
--
Ondrej Sury <[hidden email]>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Loïc Minier
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006, Ondrej Sury wrote:
> Can we possibly backport changes needed to support gtk2.10 into
> libgnomeui 2.14.x?

 Is only libgnomeui affected?

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+

Josselin Mouette
In reply to this post by Ondřej Surý-4
Le lundi 03 juillet 2006 à 09:35 +0200, Ondrej Sury a écrit :
> On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 19:21 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> > DirectFB support. At that moment, we will upload it to experimental,
> > together with gtk2-engines 2.9/2.10 and libgnomeui 2.15. This will also
> > be the time for IM modules packages to be rebuilt.
>
> Can we possibly backport changes needed to support gtk2.10 into
> libgnomeui 2.14.x?

This would be like shipping libgnomeui 2.16 without the bugfixes. I
don't think it would be a problem to ship some 2.16 libraries without
shipping the whole 2.16 desktop.
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Josselin Mouette
In reply to this post by Josselin Mouette
Le vendredi 30 juin 2006 à 19:21 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be released.

This has just happened. It has been uploaded to unstable today.

> Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> DirectFB support.

This has also happened.

As we want to be able to upload GTK+ 2.10 to unstable as soon as
possible, we'd like to move the current experimental 2.8 packages to
unstable.

Could you tell us what is exactly needed for that without breaking d-i?
Do we need versioned conflicts with some packages?
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Frans Pop-3
On Monday 03 July 2006 11:51, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 30 juin 2006 à 19:21 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> > In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be
> > released.
>
> This has just happened. It has been uploaded to unstable today.

Hmm. I'm not totally happy that this happened without coordinating it
first. Luckily it will not break the current graphical installer (as the
udeb was named differently by Dave that the current "hacked" one).

> > Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> > DirectFB support.
>
> This has also happened.

At one point you feel like you're waiting endlessly for these releases to
happen, and then you get rushed by them ;-)

> As we want to be able to upload GTK+ 2.10 to unstable as soon as
> possible, we'd like to move the current experimental 2.8 packages to
> unstable.
>
> Could you tell us what is exactly needed for that without breaking d-i?
> Do we need versioned conflicts with some packages?

The gtk2.0+directfb packages _do_ have the same names as existing
packages, so for that a coordinated upload is necessary.

AFAIK versioned conflicts are of no use for d-i. We just have to make sure
that udebs that depend on the cairo and gtk libs are rebuilt ASAP after
the new libs hit unstable.
We also have to ask FTP masters for removal of the hacked source packages
and their binaries, but that can wait until after the rebuild.

I had just come to the decision to delay this until _after_ the d-i Beta3
release, mainly because when I tested the image Davide created last week,
I noticed some problems for which I've just sent a mail [1].
I'd like to await reactions from Davide and Attilio before making a
decision. Can you give me till the end of the week?

Cheers,
FJP

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2006/07/msg00089.html

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Sven Luther
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:08:49PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 03 July 2006 11:51, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> > > DirectFB support.
> >
> > This has also happened.
>
> At one point you feel like you're waiting endlessly for these releases to
> happen, and then you get rushed by them ;-)

Which is why you have to plan accordyingly, coordinate with upstream, and
prepare the work with the cvs snapshots or other devel versions, instead of
losing time with a known broken setup, work that will be thrown out anyway in
a not-so-distant future, as the world goes forward.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Eddy Petrișor
In reply to this post by Frans Pop-3
On 03/07/06, Frans Pop <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Monday 03 July 2006 11:51, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le vendredi 30 juin 2006 à 19:21 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> > > In the next days, the stable 1.2 branch of libcairo should be
> > > released.
> >
> > This has just happened. It has been uploaded to unstable today.
>
> Hmm. I'm not totally happy that this happened without coordinating it
> first. Luckily it will not break the current graphical installer (as the
> udeb was named differently by Dave that the current "hacked" one).

I think Josselin was reffering to upstream.

> > > Sometime during summer, GTK+ 2.10 should be released, with integrated
> > > DirectFB support.
> >
> > This has also happened.
>
> At one point you feel like you're waiting endlessly for these releases to
> happen, and then you get rushed by them ;-)
>
> > As we want to be able to upload GTK+ 2.10 to unstable as soon as
> > possible, we'd like to move the current experimental 2.8 packages to
> > unstable.
> >
> > Could you tell us what is exactly needed for that without breaking d-i?
> > Do we need versioned conflicts with some packages?
>
> The gtk2.0+directfb packages _do_ have the same names as existing
> packages, so for that a coordinated upload is necessary.
>
> AFAIK versioned conflicts are of no use for d-i. We just have to make sure
> that udebs that depend on the cairo and gtk libs are rebuilt ASAP after
> the new libs hit unstable.

Here come the fruits of our work, the udebs will be partly built at
the same time as the regular debs enter unstable ;-). the only thing
which needs building, AIUI is cdebconf(-gtk).
The rest are already ok.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Josselin Mouette
In reply to this post by Frans Pop-3
Le lundi 03 juillet 2006 à 22:08 +0200, Frans Pop a écrit :

> The gtk2.0+directfb packages _do_ have the same names as existing
> packages, so for that a coordinated upload is necessary.
>
> AFAIK versioned conflicts are of no use for d-i. We just have to make sure
> that udebs that depend on the cairo and gtk libs are rebuilt ASAP after
> the new libs hit unstable.
> We also have to ask FTP masters for removal of the hacked source packages
> and their binaries, but that can wait until after the rebuild.
>
> I had just come to the decision to delay this until _after_ the d-i Beta3
> release, mainly because when I tested the image Davide created last week,
> I noticed some problems for which I've just sent a mail [1].
> I'd like to await reactions from Davide and Attilio before making a
> decision. Can you give me till the end of the week?

How about uploading these packages with new names for the udebs? This
would allow us to fix those names at the same moment.
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Davide Viti
In reply to this post by Eddy Petrișor
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 09:42:55AM +0300, Eddy Petrişor wrote:

> the only thing which needs building, AIUI is cdebconf(-gtk).  The
> rest are already ok.

yes, cdebconf-gtk needs the patch below.
The other package which needs to be changed is rootskel-gtk where
src/etc/gtk-2.0/gdk-pixbuf.loaders has to be deleted since the file
is provided by libgtk+2.0-directfb-dev


regards,
Davide


zino@slurp:~/cdebconf$ svn diff
Index: debian/control
===================================================================
--- debian/control      (revision 38711)
+++ debian/control      (working copy)
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 Source: cdebconf
 Section: utils
 Priority: optional
-Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 5.0.22), po-debconf (>= 0.5.0), libslang2-dev, libnewt-dev, libtextwrap-dev (>= 0.1-5), libdebian-installer4-dev (>= 0.41) | libdebian-installer-dev, libgtk+2.0-directfb-dev (>= 2.0.9.2-12)
+Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 5.0.22), po-debconf (>= 0.5.0), libslang2-dev, libnewt-dev, libtextwrap-dev (>= 0.1-5), libdebian-installer4-dev (>= 0.41) | libdebian-installer-dev, libgtk+2.0-directfb-dev (>= 2.8.18-3)
 Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <[hidden email]>
 Uploaders: Randolph Chung <[hidden email]>, Martin Sjogren <[hidden email]>, Petter Reinholdtsen <[hidden email]>, Joey Hess <[hidden email]>, Denis Barbier <[hidden email]>, Colin Watson <[hidden email]>, Matt Kraai <[hidden email]>, Bastian Blank <[hidden email]>, Frans Pop <[hidden email]>
 Standards-Version: 3.6.1

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Frans Pop-3
In reply to this post by Josselin Mouette
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 10:18, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> How about uploading these packages with new names for the udebs? This
> would allow us to fix those names at the same moment.

That would work. Can you do a proposal for the names you'd like to use?

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Josselin Mouette
Le mercredi 05 juillet 2006 à 01:17 +0200, Frans Pop a écrit :
> On Tuesday 04 July 2006 10:18, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > How about uploading these packages with new names for the udebs? This
> > would allow us to fix those names at the same moment.
>
> That would work. Can you do a proposal for the names you'd like to use?

I'd like to match the GTK+ names:
libgtk2.0-directfb0
libgtk2.0-directfb0-udeb
libgtk2.0-directfb-dev
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Frans Pop-3
On Wednesday 05 July 2006 19:48, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > That would work. Can you do a proposal for the names you'd like to
> > use?
>
> I'd like to match the GTK+ names:
> libgtk2.0-directfb0
> libgtk2.0-directfb0-udeb
> libgtk2.0-directfb-dev

Looks fine. Feel free to upload with those names.
This means that we can easily determine when to make the switch ourselves
by setting the correct build dependencies.

Hmm. Both the lib and -dev package probably still install the same files
as the current gtk+2.0-directfb packages. So both would need to conflict
with those.
For the udeb a Conflicts: is not needed.

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Josselin Mouette
Le mercredi 05 juillet 2006 à 21:05 +0200, Frans Pop a écrit :
> This means that we can easily determine when to make the switch ourselves
> by setting the correct build dependencies.
>
> Hmm. Both the lib and -dev package probably still install the same files
> as the current gtk+2.0-directfb packages. So both would need to conflict
> with those.
> For the udeb a Conflicts: is not needed.

Sorry for the very long delay. I've uploaded new gtk+2.0 packages to
unstable, with different names as planned. They are also rebuilt against
DirectFB 0.9.25.

They are currently sitting in NEW, but NEW processing is very fast these
days.
--
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           [hidden email]
`. `'                        [hidden email]
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plans for GTK+ - update

Frans Pop-3
On Sunday 30 July 2006 19:37, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Sorry for the very long delay. I've uploaded new gtk+2.0 packages to
> unstable, with different names as planned. They are also rebuilt
> against DirectFB 0.9.25.
>
> They are currently sitting in NEW, but NEW processing is very fast
> these days.

Thanks Joss.

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment