Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC9DB431FD0 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 05:35:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.676 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.676 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.363, URI_HEX=1.313] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QWaIkToa7qYA for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 05:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3137431FB6 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 05:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=x201s.gr8dns.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QRke3-0006nt-03; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:35:31 +0000 Received: by x201s.gr8dns.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 46BB07004FA; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 05:35:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Dirk Hohndel To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor Subject: Re: compile error of current git on F15 In-Reply-To: <4DE51768.3070409@fifthhorseman.net> References: <8762osjagp.fsf@servo.factory.finestructure.net> <4DE51768.3070409@fifthhorseman.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-174-g347983b (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 05:35:29 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Cc: notmuch , Jeffrey Stedfast X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:35:42 -0000 On Tue, 31 May 2011 12:29:28 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: Non-text part: multipart/signed > i'm CC'ing the upstream lead developer of gmime here to see if he has > any thoughts (and can correct any misrepresentations from me) -- Hi Jeffr= ey! >=20 > On 05/30/2011 02:43 PM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > > On Sun, 29 May 2011 11:44:05 -0700, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > >> CC -O2 notmuch-reply.o > >> notmuch-reply.c: In function =E2=80=98notmuch_reply_command=E2=80=99: > >> notmuch-reply.c:658:3: error: unknown type name =E2=80=98GMimeSession= =E2=80=99 > >> notmuch-reply.c:659:3: warning: passing argument 1 of =E2=80=98g_mime_= gpg_context_new=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default] > >> /usr/include/gmime-2.6/gmime/gmime-gpg-context.h:64:21: note: expected= =E2=80=98GMimePasswordRequestFunc=E2=80=99 but argument is of type =E2=80= =98int *=E2=80=99 > >> make: *** [notmuch-reply.o] Error 1 > >> > >> This seems to have been introduced in Jameson's crypto patch series... > >> > >> ./configure shows: > >> > >> Checking for Xapian development files... Yes (1.2.4). > >> Checking for GMime development files... Yes (gmime-2.6). > >> Checking for Glib development files (>=3D 2.14)... Yes. > >=20 > > Hey, Dirk. Looks like you're using gmime-2.6, which is something I've > > never looked at, and it looks like there are API changes. This of > > course doesn't help you, Dirk, but this probably means we should require > > libgmime-2.4, at least until we can figure out how to support both > > versions, which I'm not sure how to handle. > >=20 > > Dirk, just out of curiosity, what system are you running that is > > provides gmime 2.6? >=20 > F15 probably means Fedora 15. Correct =20 > gmime 2.6 has not been released yet; gmime 2.5 is the development > version (which itself has an unstable API); the project uses the > even=3Dstable/odd=3Dunstable version numbering scheme. >=20 > As the dev version, gmime 2.5 identifies itself as 2.6. I'm not sure i > can justify this decision. Jeffrey, can you explain? >=20 > If F15 does not have gmime 2.4 available in it, it's possible that it > may not be able to build notmuch :/ That's where I am right now. But here's the odd thing: gmime-2.6 support was explicitly added to the configure script last year: http://notmuch.198994.n3.nabble.com/PATCH-configure-Add-support-for-GMime-2= -6-td722706.html And it's only a recent change to notmuch that broke the build on F15 (it's one of the patches for the crypto support). So in my book this is a regression for notmuch! =20 > I don't think that notmuch should attempt to target a library with an > unstable API. But if anyone is interested in preparing for the gmime > 2.6 release (maybe jeffrey can hint at the timeline for us) may want to > prepare changesets that #ifdef the relevant code depending on the API > version. >=20 > Once gmime 2.6 is released, we'll need to decide if we want to remain > compatible with the old API as well, or just require gmime 2.6; but i > don't think we need to cross that bridge right now. Given what I wrote above you'll be unsurprised that I don't agree with this interpretation of the situation. This used to work and used to be supported and was broken in a recent notmuch patch. /D