opera -11_10

[ruario]

Yep, you did right when I first joined this forum. Just making sure the offer was still open.

If I understand correctly I just follow these steps when submitting an update right?

http://www.salixos.org/wiki/index.php/S ... repository

Or should I also be doing something else? (Apologies in advance if I have missed something and you have to point me in the right direction. I did look around but I can't help but feel like I may have missed something obvious.)

[thenktor]

Yes, that's the way to do it and as far as I can see it's up to date

[ruario]

It doesn't look up to date to me. As http://www.opera.com/browser/download/ will tell you the current stable version of Opera is 11.11. And as the changelog for this build states http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/unix/1111/ "Opera 11.11 is a recommended upgrade offering security and stability enhancements." (security issues are listed at the end of each changelog entry).

We only maintain a single stable version, hence all Opera users should be running Opera 11.11 (or one of our 11.50 development builds) to be secure. However, looking at the following pages:

http://download.salixos.org/i486/13.1/source/xap/opera/
http://download.salixos.org/i486/13.37/ ... xap/opera/
http://download.salixos.org/i486/curren ... xap/opera/

I only see SLKBUILDs for Opera 11.01 (for Salix 13.1) and Opera 11.10 (for Salix 13.37), i.e. there is no stable and secure version of Opera for any recent version of Salix, within the Salix source repositories.

I also note that all three SLKBUILDs do indeed use the tar package as a source, whilst laci had stated that when you use 'slapt-src', an rpm is used.

(I'll speculate the next bit because I don't have a copy of Salix to hand to check, please correct me if I am wrong)

I assume that slapt-src, will use SalixOS sources or SlackBuilds.org and hence the version being built is from the the SlackBuilds repository, which uses the Opera rpm files. If so I can see how this will work for Slackware users but not Salix users. The reason being is that the 'recommended method of install for Slackware is a full install (which includes rpm), whilst the Salix default installs do not include rpm.

Is it enough that I submit an updated SLKBUILD for inclusion in Salix? By that I mean if I provide one will slapt-src favour the Salix source repository over SlackBuilds repository?

Also do I submit this once for 13.37 or three times, once for 13.1, once for 13.37 and once for current? If you intend for them to all be supported and hence secure?

[ruario]

I fully accept removing Opera from Salix binary repo, because of the one program per task philosophy. Thank you, thenktor for writing to the maintainer, I hope the source package will be fixed sooner. I agree with you, that the best solution would be the integration of slapt-src into the salix-update-notifier.

I have mentioned it to the SlackBuild maintainer before a few versions back. I don't think he has any intention of switching. For Slackware (where rpm can be expected to be available) it is not a problem. Additionally, it is faster to repack the rpm than to run our install script, since our install script does self integrity checking, which slows it down slightly.

We could ask the SlackBuild maintainer to change the line:

Code: Select all

rpm2cpio < $CWD/$PRGNAM-${VERSION}-${REVNO}.${ARCH}.rpm | cpio -imdv

To:

Code: Select all

bsdtar xf $CWD/$PRGNAM-${VERSION}-${REVNO}.${ARCH}.rpm

BSD tar is provided by the Libarchive package and can pull apart an rpm. However, he might not see the value given that it provides no extra benefit to Slackware users who should already have rpm2cpio available.

[JRD]

It doesn't look up to date to me.

Thenktor was making reference about the wiki article, not the package.

[thenktor]

I have mentioned it to the SlackBuild maintainer before a few versions back. I don't think he has any intention of switching.

Yes, he is not interested in changing it.

Thenktor was making reference about the wiki article, not the package.

Yep

[ruario]

Ok, I have submitted a request. I think I have done it correctly.

https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/salix/ticket/715

I did not provide *.dep files because the original SLKBUILD that thenktor provided did not have *.dep files either. Obviously Opera does have dependencies but it will run on pretty much any machine that is configured as a desktop as our requirements are very minimal. We do not depend on Gtk or Qt, like most browsers. If you need me to make dep files however, I will do so.

[thenktor]

The SLKBUILD itself does not contain dep info. The opera deps are:

expat,fontconfig,freetype,gcc,cxxlibs|gcc-g++,libICE,libSM,libX11,libXau,libXdmcp,libXext,libXft,libXrender,libXt,libxcb,util-linux,zlib

[ruario]

Thanks, thenktor!

Ok, I updated the request with:

32-bit dependencies:
http://people.opera.com/ruario/slkbuild ... 86-1ro.dep

64-bit dependencies:
http://people.opera.com/ruario/slkbuild ... 64-1ro.dep

[laci]

Thanks, ruario for the package update. Will you update Opera in Salix when 11.50 (major release) will be released or just security versions (minor release)? The first one would be better I think, because if I know correctly, Opera doesn't maintain older versions.