On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:38:19PM +0100, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> > I wonder whether I could really skip the Zinc dependency. I'm also
> > afraid that if Zinc is not available I need at least xsbti - so just
> > another package I need to create. Is this correct?
>
> You ignored the zinc dependency, but now you need to patch out its use
> to avoid the compilation errors.
Yes, this is what I concluded from the errors and thus I had a look into
the code. When I did so I had the impression that if I would be able to
get rid of the zinc usage (and I hope upstream could help here to make
this safely) I would need xsbti instead. This would leave me with
another new software to package - or am I wrong with this assumption?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
