svk backport

[John Dong]

Dude, let's think for a bit: svk 0.29.... svk 1.00-1.... Which one is much 
less functional? ;) No matter what kind of problems removing two of 9985 
Unit Checks causes, it's still DRAMATICALLY better than what Hoary had to 
offer.

Furthermore, "problems" would be limited to svk only, and svk users in their 
right minds wouldn't be using 0.29, either!


Now, if you backport perl modules like SVN::Mirror, you can cause A LOT of 
problems with compatiblity with other packages -- which is the one thing 
Backports tries to avoid.


It's a much better idea to modify svk to build.

On 8/12/05, Martin Meredith <martin at sourceguru.net> wrote:
> 
> "Official" hoary backports have to be built from breezy... and I'm sure
> you understand that removing version checks etc etc etc is bad, and can
> cause major problems with stability.
> 
> Is it not possible and better to backport those perl modules too?
> 
> John Dong wrote:
> > I've been using svk for a couple weeks now, and I find Hoary's version
> > very inadequate. So, I backported 1.00-1 from Breezy. It's working very
> > well, and in the unofficial Backports tree.
> >
> > I'd like to see this in the official Backports tree, too. However,
> > there's a few build issues:
> >
> > 1) The specific versions of perl modules that it depends on cannot be
> > satisfied in Hoary. I removed the version checks.
> >
> > 2) About 5 unit tests fail, which forces the build to fail.
> > Investigating on these failures, they're for new features that want
> > those newer perl modules. However, these features aren't in SVK 0.29
> > anyway, so it's still a HUGE improvement from Hoary!
> >
> > So, control needs to be edited, and rules needs to be edited to remove
> > "make test" (disable unit testing). I've used backported svk quite a
> > bit, with no problems at all.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ubuntu-backports mailing list
> ubuntu-backports at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
> 
> 
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-backports/attachments/20050812/333e157e/attachment.htm