<html><body>
<p>Hy everyone, </p><p>Libical doesn't cary its own timezone database by default anymore, since most linux distributions also have this in their timezone package.</p><p>see the attached patch which fixes it on debian. </p><blockquote>Fr Jul 18 2008 22:30:53 CEST von Jeff Perry an pasp@users.sourceforge.net <br />Betreff: Re: Libical and Osmo - Updating rpm for Fedora 10 release<br /><br />2nd try - the mail to folks at sourceforge failed due to a mail server<br />problem on my side.<br /><br />On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 16:19 -0400, Jeff Perry wrote:<br /><blockquote>> Hi Tomasz Maka and Piotr Maka (and others)<br />><br />> I have been updating the rpm package for libical (rishi is the official<br />> maintainer at the moment - though I hope to be taking responsibility for<br />> it soon) for release with Fedora 10.<br />><br />> My research on users of the libical package shows that your application<br />> Osmo relies on libical<br />><br />> There is a known issue with osmo apparently (at least known to the<br />> debian folks) regarding failing to find libical (despite building with<br />> it) See: <a href="http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=464710" target="webcit01">http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=464710</a><br />> Libical versions 0.30, 0.31 and 0.23 all seem to have the same problem.<br />><br />> At the moment the Osmo package declares that it depends on libical but<br />> does not mention any specific version. As a result, it compiles fine but<br />> the calls made by it do not exist in the library since the API has<br />> changed since Osmo was written. This dependency is incorrect and can be<br />> fixed in one of two ways: 1) updating Osmo to use the new apis or 2)<br />> removing the "dependency" by forking your own older copy of libical and<br />> updating the spec file to not mention needing libical.<br />><br />> Perhaps the simplest path is to remove the dependency in the osmo rpm.<br />> It won't break things any further than they are now (correct me if I'm<br />> wrong here) and would allow osmo the leisure to update as time permits<br />> and at the same time allow libical packaging to proceed. (Ok it's a bit<br />> wierd to ship a library package that would then have no users - but that<br />> may change by Fedora release)<br />><br />> I know that the libical developers really would like to see code stop<br />> forking and go back to relying on their code as the official version.<br />> I agree with this. In addition there is noise from the Evolution project<br />> that they are interested in doing a merge-back of their patches.<br />><br />> QUESTION: What should be done about this? Any thoughts...<br />><br />> Now I'm going to go back to packaging and leave the code sorting to<br />> others.<br />><br />> The SVN log for Osmo shows David as the most recent submitter, so I have<br />> added him to the CC on this note. Other people on the CC line include<br />> the co-maintainers of the libical code and rishi (mentioned earlier)<br />><br />> --Jeff<br />><br /></blockquote><br /><br /></blockquote>
</body></html>