Carson Gaspar wrote:
Do I need to worry about these? autoconf-2.61, CVS HEAD as of 5 minutes
ago.
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating man/Makefile
config.status: WARNING: man/Makefile.in seems to ignore the
--datarootdir setting
config.status: creating
Carson Gaspar wrote:
You might get more testers if:
http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/anoncvs.html
Linked to from:
http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/downloads.html
Returned something more useful than a 404 error...
Kind of hard to test when you can't get the source.
Fixed.
--
Kenneth Murchison
Hi,
I would really appreciate if someone could give me some pointers to get
the cvs trunk compiled. I eager to test :)
Thanks in advance,
Rudy
Rudy Gevaert wrote:
Ken Murchison wrote:
Folks,
I *think* 2.3.10 is just about ready. Does anyone feel that there are
any showstopper bugs
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
I would really appreciate if someone could give me some pointers to get the
cvs trunk compiled. I eager to test :)
All I need to do is:
aclocal -I cmulocal
autoheader
autoconf
./configure
I'm not convinced that the -I cmulocal is needed.
Ken Murchison wrote:
Folks,
I *think* 2.3.10 is just about ready. Does anyone feel that there are
any showstopper bugs that need to be addressed before I make a release
candidate?
To help a bit, I have tried build from CVS.
I checkout out the trunk, and I thought I should sh SMakefile.
This is a show stopper, i.e., it results in data loss:
https://bugzilla.andrew.cmu.edu/show_bug.cgi?id=2919
The two fixes are pretty trivial. I have other comments on running
ctl_mboxlist -m from cyrus.conf START, but those are probably not as
critical as these fixes.
This is
Wesley Craig wrote:
This is a show stopper, i.e., it results in data loss:
https://bugzilla.andrew.cmu.edu/show_bug.cgi?id=2919
The two fixes are pretty trivial. I have other comments on running
ctl_mboxlist -m from cyrus.conf START, but those are probably not as
critical as these
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Ken Murchison wrote:
I spent a lot of time cleaning things up so that the number of warnings from
'gcc -W -Wall' are minimal. The one that has me baffled is this:
warning: type-punning to incomplete type might break strict-aliasing rules
I only see this with GCC 4.1.0
David Carter wrote:
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Ken Murchison wrote:
I spent a lot of time cleaning things up so that the number of
warnings from 'gcc -W -Wall' are minimal. The one that has me baffled
is this:
warning: type-punning to incomplete type might break strict-aliasing
rules
I only
