Return-Path: Message-ID: <1328520596.321.9.camel@pohly-mobl1.fritz.box> Subject: Re: bluez 4.97: build failure when used in C++ apps From: Patrick Ohly To: Milan Crha Cc: Rohan Garg , Marcel Holtmann , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, ying.an.deng@intel.com, ulf.hofemeier@intel.com, ning.w.wang@intel.com, Tino Keitel Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:29:56 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1328517973.2036.8.camel@localhost> References: <1326702341.3360.107.camel@pohly-mobl1.fritz.box> <1326705845.6454.274.camel@aeonflux> <1326708597.3360.133.camel@pohly-mobl1.fritz.box> <1328439363.32199.20.camel@pohly-mobl1.fritz.box> <1328517973.2036.8.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 List-ID: On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 09:46 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > On Sun, 2012-02-05 at 16:29 +0530, Rohan Garg wrote: > > I can file a bug for tracking purposes and get the patched package in > > the archives, as long as upstream is willing to accept the patch ( or > > a modified version of the patch ) in the near future. I don't speak > > for the rest of the Ubuntu developers, but I consider the best > > approach to getting issues fixed in distros. > > Hi, > I do not package bluez for Fedora, thus I've no idea about it, but we > found this issue while building on Fedora. And is it still broken or was bluez patched? I don't remember. > Rohan, is it a typo or you really meant to say "fixed in distro"? As far > as I can tell, all the major distros will suffer of the issue, thus why > should each of them apply patch on their own, when it belongs to > upstream, from my point of view? Fixing it upstream certainly would be preferred, but as long as it is not fixed there, distros need to find a workaround if they want to continue supporting C++ apps like SyncEvolution. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.