patch or not patch ?
John (J5) Palmieri
johnp at redhat.com
Mon Oct 16 09:56:53 PDT 2006
As the maintainer of both upstream and the fedora patches I can say that
all the ones that need to go upstream are upstream. The only difference
is the audit patches which is just a reporting system used at Red Hat
and is SELinux specific. I'll ask our audit guys again if they want it
upstream but they have said it is pretty uninteresting in the past.
As for incompatibilities with FC-5 vs other distros it is the fact that
D-Bus has changed rapidly and FC-5 has an old version. FC-6 will have a
later version which I plan to update to 1.0 once it comes out. Painful
I know but that is software development. It isn't until recently where
I could recommend D-Bus be used in apps which are required to be forward
compatible (i.e. third party apps which are not compiled and distributed
for specific distros). It is also why we still have
DBUS_API_WILL_CHANGE_AND_SCREW_ME macro ;-) I need to take that out
On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 12:18 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> frederic heem wrote:
> > The original post is to kindly request to the fedora packager and the dbus
> > maintainer to apply patches to the dbus source repository. That' all.
> Someone needs to post each patch to bugzilla or the list with an
> explanation of what it is ...
> dbus mailing list
> dbus at lists.freedesktop.org
John (J5) Palmieri <johnp at redhat.com>
More information about the dbus