geary backport to bullseye

[Andres Salomon]

On Wed, Oct 5 2022 at 06:07:04 PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha 
<jeremy.bicha at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 4:54 PM Andres Salomon <dilinger at queued.net> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> 
> The blocker for migration to Testing is that geary's build test is
> failing on armel and armhf.

Ah, yeah, I had missed that.


> 
>>  As far as the backport, I had to backport the following packages:
>> 
>>  gi-docgen_2022.1+ds-1~bpo11+1_source.changes
>>  libhandy-1_1.8.0-1~bpo11+1_source.changes
> 
> You probably don't actually need or want that version of libhandy. The
> dependency was bumped for the GNOME 42 dark theme preference (which
> wouldn't work on Debian 11).
> 
> I don't believe you need gi-docgen either.


Even without the gnome 42 patch, libhandy has a versioned build-dep on 
1.2.1. The version in bullseye is 1.0.3-2. Dropping the 1.2 
requirement, the build fails w/


../src/client/plugin/desktop-notifications/desktop-notifications.vala:145.9-145.28: 
error: The name `loadable_icon' does not exist in the context of 
`Hdy.Avatar' (libhandy-1)
        avatar.loadable_icon = icon as GLib.LoadableIcon;
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
../src/client/plugin/desktop-notifications/desktop-notifications.vala:146.22-146.48: 
error: The name `draw_to_pixbuf_async' does not exist in the context of 
`Hdy.Avatar' (libhandy-1)
        icon = yield avatar.draw_to_pixbuf_async(32, window_scale, 
null);
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Compilation failed: 2 error(s), 0 warning(s)


A newer gi-docgen is a requirement of libhandy 1.8. I didn't think it 
was worth trying an earlier version of libhandy.


> 
> Ideally, you could isolate the specific commits that fix your issues
> and then get those fixes into a stable update for geary so that
> everyone using Geary on Debian 11 benefits.
> 
> I'm not going to personally work on backports as I have too many
> projects I'm working on for Ubuntu and for Debian Testing. We do need
> to know if you do a backport as it could affect the Breaks we added
> for gnome-online-accounts as part of the big GNOME 43 transition.
> 
> Why don't you try building geary 40.0-1? I believe all the later
> changes are unnecessary for Debian 11. It simplifies you needing to
> revert so many things.
> 
> 

You're right that 40.0-1 simplifies things; the only thing that was 
necessary was the libhandy backport.

I guess I could try downgrading again and seeing if I can 
reproduce/debug the issues that I have with 3.38, but I'm also not 
super excited about spending a lot of time debugging it when we're 
probably only 9 months away from a bookworm release.