[Bugs] #2052 UNSP: Tux-paint fails to install
Sugar Labs Bugs
bugtracker-noreply at sugarlabs.org
Fri Sep 10 11:39:49 EDT 2010
#2052: Tux-paint fails to install
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: cgaray | Owner: alsroot
Type: defect | Status: closed
Priority: Unspecified by Maintainer | Milestone: Unspecified by Release Team
Component: activities.sugarlabs.org | Version: 0.88.x
Severity: Blocker | Resolution: wontfix
Keywords: | Distribution: Fedora
Status_field: Unconfirmed |
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Comment(by mikus):
Replying to [comment:8 alsroot]:
> > Shouldn't it just try to build locally if there's no matching binary
in the bundle?
> Well, not all things at once.
I realize that SugarLabs NEEDS to use 0install to accomodate the various
environments. But I as an independent tester am in effect functioning as
the distributor for my own "country".
Back before 0install was merged into Tux-paint, I was able (via yum) to
manually ADD missing packages (e.g., libpaper) to my system, if running
Tux-paint depended upon a particular package being present. It would be
nice if, when 0install failed to get binaries from bazaar.sl.o, it would
log (clearly) what was needed. I (as the virtual "country distribution
provider") could then be responsible for manually adding those binaries to
my environment, and be able to run the Activity despite 0install itself
not having access to something.
--
Ticket URL: <http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/2052#comment:9>
Sugar Labs <http://sugarlabs.org/>
Sugar Labs bug tracking system
More information about the Bugs
mailing list