> On 24 Jul 2021, at 16:41, Gavin Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 03:06:40AM +0100, Sam James wrote: >> They appear to be fixed upstream in gnulib - there's a variety of commits [1] >> which solve conflicting macros. Following README-hacking, I updated gnulib >> to commit c567dcac24dd90a2be051772d9a8c8bbf869221a there and texinfo builds! >> >> Please let me know if I can provide any other useful information! >> >> [0] https://bugs.gentoo.org/803485 >> [1] >> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/commit/?id=0c907f7da13232908f05c415b8cec56024071906 > > I've updated the gnulib checkouts in commit c9ade3f83d. I hope this issue > doesn't affect many other projects that use Gnulib. I remember that there > were changes made a few months ago in Gnulib relating to this nonnull > keyword (for Texinfo on DragonFlyBSD), so hopefully it was okay before that > and not too many other projects are affected.
Huge thanks for the rapid response & fix! I concur -- let's hope there's not too many of these. I _am_ a bit worried about GNU projects which are reliant on gnulib that haven't made a release this year though. I suspect we can make this work in Gentoo without such a release, but does it at all align with your plans for the next texinfo release if I said that glibc-2.34 is expected around the 1st of August? It's really no bother if not, because we're going to have a lot of these bugs to handle all over the place (13 so far), but I thought I may as well ask while I'm here! Again, big thanks for your work & response. Best, sam
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
