Message: previous - next
Month: September 2010

Re: [trinity-devel] Trinity 3.5.12 pre-release source tarballs

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:03:50 -0500
>>> Good suggestions!  This is why the test tarballs
>>> (which I can now say for
>>> certain are NOT final) were published early, to get
>>> feedback from
>>> distribution packagers. ;-)
>> Yes, I saw the recent security updates. I cleaned house here and
>> downloaded the entire SVN tree after those updates. Everything compiled.
>>> The monolithic tarball is the entire source tree provided
>>> in the original SVN archive structure.
>> Perhaps the link should read:
>> Complete core and non-core packages SVN source tree
>>> The complete tarball is a collection of all the
>>> smaller module tarballs in one file for easy downloading.
>> Perhaps the link should read:
>> Complete non-core packages SVN source tree
>>> I suppose the traditional packages mentioned above could be
>>> provided in
>>> one more tarball.  Of course, that means that
>>> everything else should go in
>>> another tarball, which brings up the question of whether or
>>> not the
>>> "complete" file should be retained as-is or split into two
>>> separate files,
>>> "core" and "extra".
>> Variety provides end-users more choices. Many people do not have
>> high-speed connections.
>> 1. Provide one link to each individual package source tarball, just as
>> you
>> have right now.
>> 2. Provide one link to one tar.bz2 file containing all traditional core
>> package sources, which includes arts but also now includes tqtinterface.
>> 3. Provide one link to one tar.bz2 for all non-core source tarballs.
>> 4. Provide one link to the entire SVN source tree.
>> 5. Provide one link to the SVN tree of the traditional core packages.
>> 6. Provide one link to the SVN tree of all non-core packages.
>> I'm unsure about the latter three. As I discovered in my early efforts
>> with this project, there is no way to sync a local SVN tree after
>> downloading the tree as a tarball or ISO image. I had to delete that
>> directory and then use svnadmin and svn co to sync my local tree. I
>> wonder
>> whether those SVN tree tarballs provide value or waste bandwidth?
>> Another note. I wonder about users' responses when they select a link at
>> your web site and are redirected to some place at the University of
>> Idaho.
>> I think the link at your site should contain an informational message
>> that
>> the sources are stored at that location and the SVN tree is stored at
>> your
>> web site. Then people would know and won't wonder whether they were
>> hijacked.
> Done.
> The source files now published are the final 3.5.12 versions.  Binary
> builds are catching up as I write this, and I have already filed the first
> bug targeted for 3.5.13 ;-).
> Official release is in around 24 hours (late in the day on October 1,
> 2010), and will occur on schedule provided that no mirror sync glitches
> occur between now and then.
> I don't know how you want Slackware to be mentioned in the release notes.
> Would it work to direct people to your site for the installation
> instructions, and then you can redirect them back to my site/the mirror
> for any downloads that might be needed?  That would allow a few more days
> for you to finish building the packages based on the finalized sources.
> Tim

You might want to hold off on firing off the build processes; I think I
just sent a false alarm.  No one here has tried logging in with a new test
user; I just tried it and got two Trash icons.

This behavior was caused by one file that snuck through in kdebase.  The
commit will go out shortly, after I have ensured correct behavior.  For
now the release is still scheduled for late October 1, however the mirror
sync schedule may force a miss on that deadline.

Sorry for the confusion!