Ken Moffat wrote:
If you run the tests for inkscape-0.91 (needs both lxdm and numpy)
there are five failures because four svg files were omitted from the
tarball.
I got a very quick explanation on their list, and I've downloaded
the missing files and created a 12K patch. Is it acceptable to put
that in the book as 'recommended, if running the testsuite'. If
not, how should I describe the failures / should I instead add a URL
with an explanation like *create the directory
share/extensions/test/svg/ and then download the four files found at
[long URL]" ?
Sure, both a patch and an explanation is reasonable. The size of the
patch is really not a factor.
I think I'd put the patch as Optional for full test coverage instead of
recommended.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
