From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id +BuSMUuHiGCPfwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 23:51:07 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id UE8pLUuHiGD5VAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:51:07 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A81816039 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 23:51:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:37774 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVbm-0001nI-D4 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:51:06 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53980) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVbi-0001nB-Fx for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:51:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39660) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVbi-0001ae-8K for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:51:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVbi-0000i8-7H for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:51:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#48028] [PATCH wip-gnome v4 3/8] gnu: gtkmm: Add missing native-input and correct propagated-inputs Resent-From: Mark H Weaver Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:51:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48028 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Raghav Gururajan , Leo Prikler , 48028@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 48028-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48028.16195602102661 (code B ref 48028); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:51:02 +0000 Received: (at 48028) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Apr 2021 21:50:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51204 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVas-0000gq-21 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:50:10 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([64.112.178.59]:38634) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVaq-0000gZ-Tp for 48028@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:50:09 -0400 Received: from mhw by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbVai-0005Ei-ON; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:50:00 -0400 From: Mark H Weaver In-Reply-To: <0af67af0-9649-13f6-6740-60b8cc05ee1f@raghavgururajan.name> References: <20210426081145.28926-1-rg@raghavgururajan.name> <20210426081145.28926-5-rg@raghavgururajan.name> <73660fda850714bb152afc392df78addecd29932.camel@student.tugraz.at> <88a82777-3c12-58d6-912f-196ea150f772@raghavgururajan.name> <610e1f33a099e2b8fad8f5df21447f9108082a9c.camel@student.tugraz.at> <878s55j6sy.fsf@netris.org> <0af67af0-9649-13f6-6740-60b8cc05ee1f@raghavgururajan.name> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:49:17 -0400 Message-ID: <87czufqtxj.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.00 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; none X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 8A81816039 X-Spam-Score: -4.00 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: iUwXULNQwwG/ Hi Raghav, Raghav Gururajan writes: >> It would be good to avoid these version-specific references, if >> possible. Can you help me understand the rationale? Did you find that >> there is an incompatibility between the latest stable versions of >> 'gtkmm', 'atkmm', 'cairomm', and 'pangomm'? If so, could you help me >> understand the nature of that incompatibility? Perhaps it can be >> addressed in another way. > > Its because of ABI incompatibility. The pkg-config for gtkmm, checks for > specific ABI versions of atkmm, cairomm and pangomm. > >> If it turns out that these versioned references are truly unavoidable, >> it would be good to add comments next to those references, briefly >> explaining the rationale. > > I have added comment in the code, in v5. Respectfully, it seems to me that you've been too quick to dismiss my concerns. As I pointed out in my previous email: (1) [These versioned references] will likely lead to conflicts within profiles. For example, a profile that includes both 'gtkmm' and 'cairomm' may fail to build, because it would require including both 'cairomm' and 'cairomm-1.13', This could be a real annoyance. Guix users should be able to run "guix install gtkmm atkmm cairomm pangomm" and have that work. With these proposed patches applied, I suspect that it might not work. Traditional GNU/Linux distributions that package GNOME 40 will certainly choose versions of 'gtkmm', 'atkmm', 'cairomm', and 'pangomm' that are compatible with each other. We should too, I think. >From my own experience performing a GNOME upgrade for Guix a few years ago, I remember that when the GNOME developers produce a new GNOME release, they provide somewhere a list of the versions of each component that are part of that release. Presumably they choose those versions to be compatible with each other. This makes me wonder if some of the GNOME components on the 'wip-gnome' branch are newer than they should be (perhaps a development version) or older than they should be. What do you think? Regards, Mark -- Support Richard Stallman against the vicious disinformation campaign against him and the FSF. See for more.