#11232: we should not build patch on Cygwin
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  dimpase       |          Owner:  tbd         
       Type:  defect        |         Status:  needs_review
   Priority:  major         |      Milestone:  sage-4.7    
  Component:  cygwin        |       Keywords:              
Work_issues:                |       Upstream:  N/A         
   Reviewer:  David Kirkby  |         Author:              
     Merged:                |   Dependencies:              
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Changes (by dimpase):

  * status:  needs_work => needs_review


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:6 drkirkby]:
 > 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?

 why should patch be different from Atlas? I went the way it was done for
 Atlas.
 OK, there is an inconsistency in design here, as you point out,
 but it's a minor and fixable one---if one has plenty of time and a Windows
 machine at hand to test things. But the gain would be small.

 >
 > 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.

 well, yes, it would. Hence there is an argument...


 > 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.

 if you untar the spkg file and do
 {{{
 hg diff -r3:6
 }}}

 you will see the difference. Do we need to post perfectly reproducible
 things like this here?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11232#comment:9>
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.

Reply via email to