#11232: we should not build patch on Cygwin
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Reporter: dimpase | Owner: tbd
Type: defect | Status: needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.7
Component: cygwin | Keywords:
Work_issues: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: David Kirkby | Author:
Merged: | Dependencies:
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Changes (by drkirkby):
* status: needs_review => needs_info
Comment:
If Cygwin needs ''patch'' installed this should be checked early on. We
test that a Fortran compiler exists well before we start to use it. Why
should ''patch'' be any different?
Exiting on Cygwin is sensible if there' no need to install ''patch'', but
testing if the program exists should in my opinion be done much earlier
on. I believe the way to do that is probably to use {{{AC_CHECK_PROG}}} in
the 'prereq' part of Sage.
Also note running ''patch'' with no arguments will leave it there sitting
for input.
Would it not be better to install ''patch.exe.manifest'' from
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-03/msg00010.html
? Then we could install ''patch'' the same way as any other program, and
know it behaves the same, as we have the same version.
Something along the lines of
{{{
if [ "x$UNAME" = xCYGWIN ] ; then
cp patches/patch.exe.manifest "$SAGE_LOCAL/bin"
fi
}}}
Can you attach a Mercurial patch for review purposes, so we can see what
you are trying to do. The ticket is much more informative if it has the
changes attached.
Dave
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11232#comment:6>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
