[Pkg-citadel-devel] Libical and Osmo - Updating rpm for Fedora 10 release

w.goesgens room_0000000001.pkg-citadel at mail.outgesourced.org
Mon Nov 2 22:28:44 UTC 2009

Hy everyone, 

Libical doesn't cary its own timezone database by default anymore, since most
linux distributions also have this in their timezone package.

see the attached patch which fixes it on debian. 
>Fr Jul 18 2008 22:30:53 CEST von Jeff Perry an pasp at users.sourceforge.net 
>Betreff: Re: Libical and Osmo - Updating rpm for Fedora 10 release
>2nd try - the mail to folks at sourceforge failed due to a mail server
>problem on my side.
>On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 16:19 -0400, Jeff Perry wrote:
>>> Hi Tomasz Maka and Piotr Maka (and others)
>>> I have been updating the rpm package for libical (rishi is the official
>>> maintainer at the moment - though I hope to be taking responsibility for
>>> it soon) for release with Fedora 10.
>>> My research on users of the libical package shows that your application
>>> Osmo relies on libical
>>> There is a known issue with osmo apparently (at least known to the
>>> debian folks) regarding failing to find libical (despite building with
>>> it)  See: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=464710
>>> Libical versions 0.30, 0.31 and 0.23 all seem to have the same problem.
>>> At the moment the Osmo package declares that it depends on libical but
>>> does not mention any specific version. As a result, it compiles fine but
>>> the calls made by it do not exist in the library since the API has
>>> changed since Osmo was written. This dependency is incorrect and can be
>>> fixed in one of two ways: 1) updating Osmo to use the new apis or 2)
>>> removing the "dependency" by forking your own older copy of libical and
>>> updating the spec file to not mention needing libical.
>>> Perhaps the simplest path is to remove the dependency in the osmo rpm.
>>> It won't break things any further than they are now (correct me if I'm
>>> wrong here) and would allow osmo the leisure to update as time permits
>>> and at the same time allow libical packaging to proceed. (Ok it's a bit
>>> wierd to ship a library package that would then have no users - but that
>>> may change by Fedora release)
>>> I know that the libical developers really would like to see code stop
>>> forking and go back to relying on their code as the official version.
>>> I agree with this. In addition there is noise from the Evolution project
>>> that they are interested in doing a merge-back of their patches.
>>> QUESTION: What should be done about this? Any thoughts...
>>> Now I'm going to go back to packaging and leave the code sorting to
>>> others.
>>> The SVN log for Osmo shows David as the most recent submitter, so I have
>>> added him to the CC on this note. Other people on the CC line include
>>> the co-maintainers of the libical code and rishi (mentioned earlier)
>>> --Jeff

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-citadel-devel/attachments/20091102/07bdb64a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fix_osmo_TZConfig.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 359 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-citadel-devel/attachments/20091102/07bdb64a/attachment.diff>

More information about the Pkg-citadel-devel mailing list