Re: Windows Build 2.3.10 r18664 - dead on arrival!
Kim Wood kim.w...@bigpond.net.au writes: WTF? But 2.3.10-setup.exe (74Mb) runs fine. It also reports itself also as build r18664, but with a different file size to Windows nightly build r18664 (76Mb). Anyway, there you go... At least 2.3.10 runs fine. The tag build and nightly build could be the same revision depending on if there were any more commits between the tag and the build time. That's why they both report r18664. As for the size difference -- the tag build rebuilds all the dependencies from source, whereas the nightly build never rebuilds dependencies. So the nightly build could be using way-old libraries. Hope this explains the differences. Regards, Kim -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warl...@mit.eduPGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Windows Build 2.3.10 r18664 - dead on arrival!
WTF? But 2.3.10-setup.exe (74Mb) runs fine. It also reports itself also as build r18664, but with a different file size to Windows nightly build r18664 (76Mb). Anyway, there you go... At least 2.3.10 runs fine. Regards, Kim -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Windows-Build-2-3-10-r18664-dead-on-arrival-tp1558502p1558569.html Sent from the GnuCash - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Windows Build 2.3.10 r18664 - dead on arrival!
On Wednesday 17 February 2010, Kim Wood wrote: WTF? But 2.3.10-setup.exe (74Mb) runs fine. It also reports itself also as build r18664, but with a different file size to Windows nightly build r18664 (76Mb). Anyway, there you go... At least 2.3.10 runs fine. Regards, Kim The revision naming is confusing. 2.3.10 is really r18662, but at the time it got built, two more commits were made in the trunk, making the most recent revision number r18664. But the two later commits don't affect the 2.3.10 build: 2.3.10 is built from gnucash/tags/2.3.10 the nighlies are built from gnucash/trunk The later commits were on trunk only. I suspect it's changeset r18664 that is causing this: it updates a number of gnome packages, including libpng. I'm not sure yet what goes wrong though... Geert ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
