https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476614
Peter Lemenkov <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Randy Barlow from comment #1) > I tried to build erlang-cache_tab with this patch applied on my system, and > it looks like rebar does not find p1_utils: > > + /usr/bin/rebar eunit skip_deps=true -vv > > DEBUG: Evaluating config script > "/home/rbarlow/rpmbuild/BUILD/cache_tab-1.0.9/rebar.config.script" > > DEBUG: Consult config file > "/home/rbarlow/rpmbuild/BUILD/cache_tab-1.0.9/rebar.config" > > DEBUG: Rebar location: "/usr/bin/rebar" > > DEBUG: Consult config file > "/home/rbarlow/rpmbuild/BUILD/cache_tab-1.0.9/src/cache_tab.app.src" > > DEBUG: is_app_available, looking for App p1_utils with Path > "/home/rbarlow/rpmbuild/BUILD/cache_tab-1.0.9/deps/p1_utils" > > DEBUG: Directory expected to be an app dir, but it doesn't exist (yet?): > > /home/rbarlow/rpmbuild/BUILD/cache_tab-1.0.9/deps/p1_utils > > DEBUG: Available deps: [] > DEBUG: Missing deps : [{dep,bad_name,p1_utils,".*", > {git,"https://github.com/processone/p1_utils";, > > {tag,"1.0.9"}}, > > false}] > > Does rebar not use Erlang's code_server.erl to find its libs? If not, I > think we might need to either patch rebar, or patch the macros to add the > new path to the search path for rebar. > > What do you think? I believe rebar redefines paths in some different way (to include ./deps/*/ebin and some other paths) so I think it's not a blocker at this point. What I'd consider a successful Feature completion is running some code from /usr/share without providing any extra command line switches. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ erlang mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
