On 3 Nov 2012, at 09:50, Quentin Mathé <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Le 2 nov. 2012 à 21:35, Tom Davie a écrit : > >> On 2 Nov 2012, at 19:37, Richard Frith-Macdonald >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 2 Nov 2012, at 19:27, Robert Slover wrote: >>> >>>> Isn't the 'sudo' failing there? That seems likely to cause problems. >>>> >>> Good point ... could it be that sudo is messing up the PATH or somethign >>> similar so GNUstep (specifically the gnustep-config script) isn't being >>> found? >>> I've added warnng messages to the makefile in svn, to at least indicate if >>> it is being read, and which patch it's taking (the standalone or >>> gnustep-filesystem install). > > > On Ubuntu I recently solved this problem by editing the /etc/sudoers file and > commenting out the 'Defaults secure_path=XXX' line. This way, 'sudo -E' > inherits the PATH variable as customized by GNUstep.sh and gnustep-config can > be found (by the libobjc2 GNUmakefile). > If secure_path is enabled, the PATH variable is overriden by the secure_path > value even when -E is passed to sudo.
Excellent, thanks Quentin, that's exactly what the issue was! Tom Davie _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
