After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 668812 - Non-parallel installable files in vala
Non-parallel installable files in vala
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: vala
Classification: Core
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Vala maintainers
Vala maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-01-27 08:18 UTC by Vincent Untz
Modified: 2012-06-24 15:09 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Vincent Untz 2012-01-27 08:18:47 UTC
vala is in general quite nice to deal with, for parallel-installability. However, there are three files which are a bit blocking:

/usr/share/aclocal/vala.m4
/usr/share/aclocal/vapigen.m4
/usr/share/vala/Makefile.vapigen

It's unclear to me how to really deal with them. Is there any guarantee that the more recent versions of those files will always provide a compatible version of what was in the old versions of those files?
Comment 1 Evan Nemerson 2012-06-20 08:17:00 UTC
I'm ok with making those guarantees for the vapigen stuff if Jürg doesn't object.
Comment 2 Jürg Billeter 2012-06-20 11:26:41 UTC
Sounds fine to me.
Comment 3 Evan Nemerson 2012-06-20 18:51:44 UTC
Then we should also probably be installing those files in unversioned builds.
Comment 4 Jürg Billeter 2012-06-20 20:39:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Then we should also probably be installing those files in unversioned builds.

Do you mean in versioned builds? In unversioned builds, they are already installed.

I don't think we should install those files in versioned builds as that would cause package conflicts. The idea is that distributions enable unversioned build for the most recent version and disable it for the older versions.
Comment 5 Evan Nemerson 2012-06-20 23:02:01 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Do you mean in versioned builds? In unversioned builds, they are already
> installed.

D'oh!  Yes.

> I don't think we should install those files in versioned builds as that would
> cause package conflicts. The idea is that distributions enable unversioned
> build for the most recent version and disable it for the older versions.

That sounds reasonable to me... I just filed a bug for Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678342

Any reason to keep this bug open?
Comment 6 Jürg Billeter 2012-06-24 15:09:10 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> That sounds reasonable to me... I just filed a bug for Debian:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678342
> 
> Any reason to keep this bug open?

No, let's mark this as resolved.