Printing functionality in Gutsy (gtkmm 2.12.0) is broken

Note that Hardy already has the correct version, but this needs to be corrected in Gutsy.

Marking as Fix Released to indicate that the problem is fixed upstream.

Hardy still has 1.2.10-8.1. Is it really fixed?

That's libgtkmm1.2-0c2a (The gtkmm 1.2 API). This is about libgtkmm2.4-1c2a (The gtkmm 2.4 API). Hardy has "1:2.12.5-2". I have never known what the 1: meant.

The 1: is called an epoch and it is used when the packager needs to make a lower version actually higher. This can happen by accident or if upstream changes versioning schemes. In this case Debian at one time used the 2.6 branch when it wasn't stable and wanted to go back to 2.4.

With respect to gtkmm2.4, the source tree of version 2.12.1 is 5MB bigger than 2.12.0 and diffstat shows:

 1479 files changed, 36064 insertions(+), 9598 deletions(-)

Which is quite a lot for a SRU. On the other hand, the vast majority of the changes seem to be in the reference documentation. Looks like ~76 non-doc files changed with mostly just a couple lines changed in most. So, I would like to hear what other MOTU SRUers think and I'd also like to see some idea of the impact of this bug. I realize that not having the printing classes is not good, but is it breaking other packages in Gutsy? If so, which ones and would they need a rebuild to be fixed?

Thanks Murray for reporting the bug and fixing this upstream.

Sorry, thanks to Jonathon for the report :-)

Yes, the changes will be in the generated reference documentation. A small change in doxygen can cause that. I don't think it's anything to be concerned about. And if they are real improvements in the documentation, then I again don't see a problem with that.

> So, I would like to hear what other MOTU SRUers think and I'd also like to see some idea of the impact of this bug. I realize that not having the printing classes is not good, but is it breaking other packages in Gutsy?
> If so, which ones and would they need a rebuild to be fixed?

No, there is no ABI change.

Alternately, if a 2.12.1 update is not acceptable for whatever reason, I believe you should be able to isolate the patch fairly easily and include it in your package. I believe this is it:
http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gtkmm?view=revision&revision=914

Also, just to add a bit of explanation for all of the changes between 2.12.0 and 2.12.1:
a) gtkmm includes pre-built documentation so that the user isn't required to have doxygen isntalled to get the API documentation
b) gtkmm is largely auto-generated from the GTK+ sources, so a very small change to one of the macros used to auto-generate the code is likely to result in lots of small changes in many files.

sorry, point a) should have included an explanation that if the release is made with a different version of doxygen, a lot of the documentation will be different, even if the content hasn't really changed. Maybe that's obvious, but I thought I'd mention it.

If my memory is correct, there was a nasty bug in doxygen around this time that caused any function that had the word 'property' in it to be incorrectly displayed, so the version of doxygen used for the release might very well have been changed between the two releases.

Ran into this bug in Gutsy & spent a while banging my head against the wall *ouch*. I've upgraded to Hardy on my dev machine but would love this fixed in Gutsy. Thanks.

This bug is marked as incomplete. What is someone waiting for, from whom?

Upstream patch linked, just needs someone to own and do this SRU. Needs formal ack from motu-sru (I just subscribed them), but I guess they will be ok with it.

ACK from motu-sru, please provide a debdiff against gutsy-proposed.

Marking as Incomplete for now, waiting for a debdiff candidate.

The 18 month support period for Gutsy Gibbon 7.10 has reached its end of life -
http://www.ubuntu.com/news/ubuntu-7.10-eol . As a result, we are closing the
Gutsy task.