[Mageia-dev] Last few packages with old udev dep... aka drop chromium-browser-unstable?

[D.Morgan]

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:
> 'Twas brillig, and D.Morgan at 11/07/12 09:07 did gyre and gimble:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:
>>> Hi Guys,
>>>
>>> There are a couple packages left still needing the old udev library and
>>> I'd like to get them sorted now.
>>>
>>> [colin at jimmy ~]$ urpmq --whatrequires lib64udev0 libudev0
>>> chromium-browser-unstable
>>> chromium-browser-unstable
>>> enna
>>> enna
>>> lib64udev0
>>> lib64zypp901
>>> libmyth0.24
>>> libudev0
>>> libzypp901
>>>
>>>
>>> All the libs can be ignored as they are all no longer needed, so it's
>>> just enna and chromium-browser-unstable.
>>>
>>> For enna, it needs fixes for (I think) new GCC or newer libvalhalla, so
>>> it would be great if someone could look at that. I'm not familiar with
>>> the project, but I did find some references that it's more or less
>>> deprecated now (Geebox seems to have switched to xbmc as it's primary
>>> frontend:
>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/geexbox-devel/VC3WFx2h9ws)
>>>
>>> For chromium-browser-unstable I propose we just drop it. We can keep the
>>> -stable chromium named as it is just now although I would personally
>>> prefer to see it just called "chromium-browser" (as no other package has
>>> this strange naming policy and arguably many of them could if we shipped
>>> two versions). I don't see a problem re-introducing an -unstable variant
>>> again in the future, but unless someone is actively maintaining it it's
>>> arguably just getting in the way.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> (CC'ed TV as he has been the most frequent committed to -unstable of late)
>>>
>>> Col
>>
>> i will update it soon ( today i hope )
>
> Cool. I presume you mean the crhomium bit?
>
> What about the enna? Anyone know anything about that?
>
> Col

yes chromium :)