Hello!

The gtk+ patch is now in core-updates.


2017-12-05 8:07 GMT+01:00 Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com>:

> FAIL: abicheck.sh
> PASS: pltcheck.sh
> ============================================================
> ================
> Testsuite summary for gtk+ 2.24.31
> ============================================================
> ================
> # TOTAL: 3
> # PASS:  2
> # SKIP:  0
> # XFAIL: 0
> # FAIL:  1
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0
> ============================================================
> ================
> See gtk/test-suite.log
> Please report to http://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=gtk%2B
> ============================================================
> ================
>
> This is what I have now.
>
> FAIL: abicheck.sh
> =================
>
> --- expected-abi        2017-12-05 05:45:34.472000000 +0000
> +++ actual-abi  2017-12-05 05:45:34.508000000 +0000
> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> +g_cclosure_marshal_BOOLEAN__BOXED_BOXED
>  gtk_about_dialog_get_artists
>  gtk_about_dialog_get_authors
>  gtk_about_dialog_get_comments
> FAIL abicheck.sh (exit status: 1
>
> This is the log.
>
>
>
> 2017-12-04 20:15 GMT+01:00 Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 04:44:00PM +0100, Gábor Boskovits wrote:
>> > Now that this problem around glibc is resolved, I think I will do some
>> > history rewrite, so that these reverts, reverting the revert.... does
>> not
>> > show up.
>> > I 'm also willing to rename the branch to have wip in the name, as this
>> > seems to be standard for longer runnig parts. WDYT?
>>
>> In general, we don't rewrite history of any public branches on our
>> Savannah instance, except for branches whose name starts with "wip-".
>> That, is "work in progress".
>>
>> But of course we can all follow our own rules on our own Git servers :)
>>
>
>