On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 20:03 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > > I expect, personally, if .2 release was building without any issue, that > I just fire the build and it'll build the same flawlessly also in .3+. > Thus I suggested on IRC to do the check on the stable version opposite, > add an option to actually use the stock libmspack, instead of forcing > not using it. Distro packagers sort of expect such (and bigger) changes > when packaging new major version, thus that's all fine on master.
Yeah, I understand that and completely agree in the general case. However, in this case the old build was *broken*. We really *should* be using the proper libmspack. In this case I *want* to make people jump through extra hoops if they want to continue to build this the broken way, after I've gone to the trouble of fixing it :) It's not as if adding --with-internal-lzx is *much* extra work, if that's really what they decide to do. > If you feel like me doing things unnecessary overcomplicated, then feel > free to commit it as is. After all, it's only my opinion (in a good > meaning of the words). If it makes you feel better about the packaging work, I can go and file a Fedora bug for the violation of the packaging guidelines; shipping a hacked-up copy of parts of libmspack instead of using the real one? :) When you package 3.8.3 for Fedora 19, you will *definitely* need to add libmspack-devel as a BuildRequires, as part of the fix for that. If I commit things as-is, that's *all* you'll have to do. If I change things around as you suggest, you'll actually have to do *more* work because you'll have to add the --without-internal-lzx option to the configure line too :) -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list [email protected] To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
