On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 06:11:33PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> Antoine Jacoutot <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 11:05:34AM +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> > > Antoine Jacoutot <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 02:53:58AM -0600, Omar Polo wrote:
> > > > > CVSROOT:      /cvs
> > > > > Module name:  ports
> > > > > Changes by:   [email protected]    2022/07/31 02:53:58
> > > > > 
> > > > > Modified files:
> > > > >       x11/gnome/aisleriot: Makefile 
> > > > > Added files:
> > > > >       x11/gnome/aisleriot/patches: patch-meson_build 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Log message:
> > > > > x11/gnome/aisleriot: don't pick up guile3 over guile2 if found
> > > > 
> > > > Hi.
> > > > I don't understand this commit.
> > > > We are explicitely passing -Dguile=2.2 in CONFIGURE_ARGS; isn't it 
> > > > working?
> > > 
> > > unfortunately not.  meson.build turns that -Dguile=2.2 into "guile >=
> > > 2.2", so if guile 3.0 is installed is still chosen over 2.2.
> > 
> > That is not at all what I see.
> > I have 3 guile versions installed and this is the result of configure 
> > without
> > the patch:
> > 
> > aisleriot 3.22.24
> > 
> >   User defined options
> >     auto_features : enabled
> >     buildtype     : plain
> >     localstatedir : /var
> >     mandir        : /usr/local/man
> >     prefix        : /usr/local
> >     sharedstatedir: /var/db
> >     strip         : True
> >     sysconfdir    : /etc
> >     wrap_mode     : nodownload
> >     guile         : 2.2
> >     theme_kde     : false
> > 
> > I checked the build output and it uses /usr/local/bin/guile2.2.
> 
> I can replicate that now.  I am sure that it picked up the wrong guile
> version before, maybe that was fixed in the latest version?  (i worked
> on that diff before the 3.22.24 update.)
> 
> I re-checked that the affected port would build correctly before
> committing, haven't tried to see if that patch was still needed.  sorry.
> 
> > Anyway, I will move it to guile3, but that patch seems unecessary in the 
> > first
> > place.
> 
> no complains from me, but i'd wait a bit before starting moving ports to
> guile3.  I still don't know on which platforms it works (only tested
> amd64 and powerpc64 - thanks gkoehler! - so far), and using guile3 means
> that the package will not be available on powerpc (until someone builds
> a binary bootstrap for it -- i don't have the hardware.)

I am only moving packages I maintain.
Most of them are gigantic fat stuff that won't make sense running on !amd64
anyway (and they are leaf ports).

-- 
Antoine

Reply via email to