Thanks. So, after removing it, we can just do "zypper dup" with M17N:Devel for testing the new ibus, right?
I removed it. Then, I could not add %posttrans to the spec file since hillwood's change contains %posttrans. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/145762 Fuminobu TAKEYAMA (2012/12/19 1:05), Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 19 Dec 2012 00:44:31 +0900, Fuminobu TAKEYAMA wrote:
(2012/12/18 16:35), Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hm, does anyone already test coverage of all M17N packages with ibus upgrade? This is the first step as a migration, then we follow the functional test of the upgraded project.
At least, hillwood and I have installed the ibus packages and been testing them to check whether they work as we expected.
That's good to hear.
What I meant as build test is to simply test the builds of all (ibus-related) packages in a single project, e.g. M17N:Devel. It's a simple systematic test, just to make sure that it doesn't break any others. This could be done in M17N as well, if M17N isn't supposed to be a "stable" repo...
What's the actual breakage with M17N:Devel? I see freetype2 update, scim and fcitx updates. If any package updates in M17N:Devel aren't considered to be submitted to M17N at any time, such updates shouldn't be included in M17N:Devel as well.
Sorry, I put freetype2 git snapshot there. It should be removed.
Thanks. So, after removing it, we can just do "zypper dup" with M17N:Devel for testing the new ibus, right?
Takashi
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-m17n+owner@opensuse.org