mono May 2009

mono@lists.fedoraproject.org

5 participants
3 discussions

Can someone review some spec files for me?
by Stephen Shaw 13 Jun '09

13 Jun '09

These are the spec files that we are using to build rpms for openSUSE. I was wondering if someone won't mind looking at them since I've never build packages for fedora. There packages require mono 2.4 so I'm hoping to be able to provide packages for fedora 11. Some of the specs don't have versions on them. That's because these files are stored in our trunk and the versions get set when we branch and tag. Thanks! Stephen http://anonsvn.mono-project.com/viewvc/trunk/uia2atk/build/specs/

4 34

Need consensus on Mono 2.0 migration
by David Nielsen 02 Jun '09

02 Jun '09

Dear list, As previously mentioned, I would love for us to start work migrating to Mono 2. This work has already been done by Ubuntu and Debian and patches are available for nearly all packages. The effect of this will be cutting the footprint of Mono apps by around 20-40% in most cases and as such presents a major advantages for our users. Jo Shields wrote a nice post to the Ubuntu devel list explaining this work: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-November/026872.html Debian packages along with migration patches can be found here. http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/pkg-cli-libs/packages/ http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/pkg-cli-apps/packages/ http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/pkg-mono/ Now I would like to get this work into F12 which means we can start doing it now and have it finished hopefully in time for the first milestone release. This will take a concerted effort from everyone currently maintaining a mono based package and the first step has to be agreeing upon a plan of attack. I would propose the following: 1. Compile a list of packages that need patching and maintainers for these packages. 2. Every package maintainer then extracts patches for his packages from Debian and posts to the list for review. 3. Once every package on the list has patches available we commit them to cvs and announce a rebuild to fedora-devel-announce. I would like to be at 2. by June 30th, any maintainers having failed to extract a patch and get it reviewed on the list by that day should expect to have their packages manually altered by a provenpackager (this is not an excuse to sit back and let me do the work though). We should aim to be at 3. on July 15th, at which point we are up to date with pkg-mono' current progress and can interact with them for future steps. This gives us a month and a half to complete the work and leaves ample room to shake out the bugs before release. We should expect fall out, it is a major improvement and it carries risks along with it. I hope we can all pull together resources to handle bug reports stemming from this work. - David

2 1

mono-2.4 and ppc64 status
by Toshio Kuratomi 30 May '09

30 May '09

Mono-2.4 has been built for ppc64 in F11 and devel. So people should be able to start rebuilding packages to include ppc64 as well as the other arches. There's a few wrinkles to watch out for: 1) Packages with dependencies will have to be built in dependency order. For instance, a lot of packages depend on the gtk-sharp2 bindings and those haven't been built yet. 2) Because of the imminent release of F11 we're in a freeze state. This means getting dependencies into the Fedora11 buildroot will require people to request tagging explicitly. This also means that if you rebuild your package for F11 with ppc64 support and later you have to get this package tagged into the release, all of the packages it depends on will need to be tagged in as well (otherwise your ppc64 build will have broken deps). With these in mind, I'd recommend people start rebuilding their mono packages on ppc64 in the devel branch. Keep track of the dependency chain you encounter. Then perform your builds in the Fedora 11 branch as updates after the release. I'm not a mono-sig member, though, so if you guys decide something else makes sense, just be sure to come up with a plan so we don't release with a bunch of broken dependencies. -Toshio

3 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

mono May 2009