GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 320007
gimp-2.3.4 does not compile with 2.13 branch of librsvg
Last modified: 2005-10-28 16:23:06 UTC
Version details: 2.13.1 Distribution/Version: YDL-4.0.1 A small fix is required to get gimp-2.3.4 to compile with the 2.13 branch of librsvg: --- plug-ins/common/svg.c- 2005-10-27 15:31:37.000000000 -0400 +++ plug-ins/common/svg.c 2005-10-27 15:31:59.000000000 -0400 @@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ handle = rsvg_handle_new (); -#if (LIBRSVG_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && LIBRSVG_MINOR_VERSION < 99) +#if (LIBRSVG_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && LIBRSVG_MINOR_VERSION < 13) rsvg_handle_set_dpi_x_y (handle, vals->resolution, vals->resolution); #else rsvg_handle_set_dpi (handle, vals->resolution, vals->resolution); @@ -540,7 +540,7 @@ handle = rsvg_handle_new (); -#if (LIBRSVG_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && LIBRSVG_MINOR_VERSION < 99) +#if (LIBRSVG_MAJOR_VERSION == 2 && LIBRSVG_MINOR_VERSION < 13) rsvg_handle_set_dpi_x_y (handle, vals->resolution, vals->resolution); #else rsvg_handle_set_dpi (handle, vals->resolution, vals->resolution);
Since you were the person who filed bug 314400, it might be helpful if you could give us your thoughts on how this bug report relates to that bug report. I for one am pretty confused.
It would appear that the librsvg team is now consistently using a three digit version tag #ifndef LIBRSVG_FEATURES_H #define LIBRSVG_FEATURES_H 1 #define LIBRSVG_MAJOR_VERSION (2) #define LIBRSVG_MINOR_VERSION (13) #define LIBRSVG_MICRO_VERSION (2) #define LIBRSVG_VERSION "" It would be prudent to query the librsvg team for an explanation. -Joseph
The 2.13 branch is an unstable development version and due to the unwillingness of the librsvg team to provide information on their versioning scheme and/or API stability, GIMP is not going to support unstable branches of librsvg. We will deal with this as soon as they have figured out their API and version issues.
Note also that there is no 2.13 branch in librsvg. You are probably talking about the HEAD branch but you should definitely do a little more research before filing such bug reports. Anyway, we will wait until the librsvg team has come up with a final decision on the API and version number to expect for the next stable release.
Swen, I have done my research. You should do yours before you flame someone who is trying to help. I am not "talking about the HEAD branch". See: ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/librsvg/2.13/ I understand your frustration given the iterations caused by bug #314400. It would be prudent to query the librsvg team [once again] for an explanation of their current versioning system. -Joseph
Joseph, As you can tell, the previous interaction did not go so well, and left both parties a bit pissed off and unwilling to repeat the experience. If you would be willing to try to get an explanation from Dom, and can give us some reasonable confidence that following some reasonably simple system will actually work, I'm sure we would all be grateful.
A branch clearly refers to CVS and CVS doesn't know about such a branch. I don't care much about what's on the GNOME FTP server as long as it isn't a stable release.
I am pretty sure that the actual problem here is that whoever prepares the librsvg packages for GNOME 2.13 is using the wrong CVS branch. Since the HEAD branch is undergoing major changes that will most likely result in an incompatible API (librsvg-3.0), the libsrvg packages should probably be created from the gnome-2-12-branch or a new branch needs to be started based on that branch.