[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] gentoo, last tweaks and questions

From: Nils Gillmann
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] gentoo, last tweaks and questions
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 11:11:30 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

David Barksdale <address@hidden> writes:

> On April 10, 2016 1:57:36 PM CDT, Nils Gillmann <address@hidden> wrote:
>>Christian Grothoff <address@hidden> writes:
>>> On 04/10/2016 02:04 PM, ng0 wrote:
>>>> Christian Grothoff <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> This should have been self-fixing if you ran './bootstrap' to
>>>>> configure. Next time you see this (kind of) message, just re-run
>>>>> ./bootstrap.
>>>> Hm, I think I need to revisit how this is done by my packages, to
>>>> exclude this behavior which might lead to a 'die' in the build
>>>> process.
>>> Well, 'bootstrap' is only needed if/when building from Subversion.
>>> there is a release, this is no longer required.
>>I have talked with lynX, and also gnunet devs afterwards, and

typo; this should've said "lynX, and also gentoo developers"

>>I'll fix packages to svn numbers now as users will get a better
>>impression with current release other than 0.10.1. When the next
>>release candidate comes out I can include it in gentoo, but there
>>shouldn't be much difference between release candidate and the
>>time it was released (svn-number), or am I wrong?
>>My personal experience of 0.10.1 vs 37011 and checkouts before
>>that was drastically different, 0.10.1 has problems which are no
>>longer existent in later numbers.
>>I'll call SVN number 37011 gnunet-{gtk-}0.10.2_rc2 in gentoo.
>>Maybe i can communicate the same with guix, we'll see. if I can't
>>i'll still manage to express it somewhere.
>>Moving to eapi 6 is almost done, so I am positive that I can
>>introduce gnunet,gnurl,gnunet-gtk next week to bugzilla gentoo
>>and become maintainer for it.
>>Guix changes rely on bug-womb and somebody responding there currently.
>>>> Especially on gentoo, where moving gnunet from eapi 5 to the new
>>>> eapi 6 gets hard and needs an entirely new build structure in the
>>>> ebuild file.
>>>>> However, I also should have just pushed the latest
>>>>>  So fixed in SVN 37009.
>>>>> -Christian
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> Would you (or someone else) know if there are tested to be
>>>> unsupported (non functional) plattforms of GNUnet?
>>>> Gentoo can support those to build on:
>>>> alpha
>>>> amd64
>>>> arm
>>>> arm 64
>>>> hppa
>>>> ia64
>>>> mips
>>>> ppc
>>>> ppc64
>>>> sh
>>>> sparc
>>>> x86
>>>> x86-fbsd
>>>> amd64-linux
>>>> ia64-linux
>>>> x86-linux
>>>> It would help for the later testings team to have some input
>>>> which ones to exclude, I can only test a limited set on the
>>>> hardware I have here.
>>> It should work on all of them, even though I don't know what "sh" is
>>> we've never had a "mips" or "alpha". We do test on amd, arm, ppc,
>>> and x86 (32 and 64-bit).
>>I don't know what "sh" is supposed to be either. People will
>>figure out.

Interesting.. thanks for the input.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]