On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 02:36:24PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: > > > From bf1f2a1c3621ba93ec99711ec78a79663acb6e82 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > Message-Id: > > <bf1f2a1c3621ba93ec99711ec78a79663acb6e82.1456734966.git....@famulari.name> > > From: Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> > > Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 02:23:43 -0500 > > Subject: [PATCH 1/1] gnu: ilmbase: Add patches to fix build on i686. > > > > Fixes <http://bugs.gnu.org/22049>. > > > > * gnu/packages/patches/ilmbase-testBox.patch, > > gnu/packages/patches/ilmbase-testBoxAlgo.patch: New files. > > * gnu-system.am (dist_patch_DATA): Add them. > > * gnu/packages/graphics.scm (ilmbase)[native-inputs]: Add patch/testBox > > and patch/testBoxAlgo. > > [arguments]: Add 'patch-for-i686' phase. > > Cool! > > I think it’d be reasonable to squash both patches in one file, and to > apply it unconditionally. WDYT?
Sure, I'll send an updated patch. I'm wondering — does the current patch handle the conditional application of the patch properly? Just looking for some feedback on the approach... > > So I gather upgrading to IlmBase 2.0.1 is not an option? 2.0.1 would be a downgrade for us; we are on 2.2.0. I did try it without success. > > Thanks, > Ludo’.
