Am Sonntag, 3. März 2013 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Andreas Enge skribis:
> > the lsof tarball contains the source in a two-stage process: After
> > unpacking, one is left with lsof_4.87_src.tar, which needs to be
> > unpacked as well.
> Weird.
I have seen it before, the tarball contains the sour
Andreas Enge skribis:
> Am Sonntag, 3. März 2013 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>> Andreas Enge skribis:
>> > This is because it is not contained in a subdirectory lib/pkgconfig,
>> > but in share/pkgconfig. Should we add "share/pkgconfig" to the lines
>> Yes, it’s non-conventional, but it won’t hurt
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
> Is it necessary to package the latest version too? (The latest version
> depends on this one [1].)
That seems like a packaging bug in GNU Fdisk, so I’d wait until this is
solved.
> I'm not sure about the license. 'COPYING' is GPLv3, but sources use
> GPLv2+.
To m
> It should be ‘CROSS_LIBRARY_PATH’ instead.
# cat foo.c
int main() {return 0;}
#
/nix/store/khdyz3i5aih56lxfk6hjvp3884apm7qb-gcc-cross-mips64el-linux-gnu-4.7.2/bin/mips64el-linux-gnu-gcc
foo.c
/nix/store/khdyz3i5aih56lxfk6hjvp3884apm7qb-gcc-cross-mips64el-linux-gnu-4.7.2/libexec/gcc/mips64el-l
Am Sonntag, 3. März 2013 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Andreas Enge skribis:
> > This is because it is not contained in a subdirectory lib/pkgconfig,
> > but in share/pkgconfig. Should we add "share/pkgconfig" to the lines
> Yes, it’s non-conventional, but it won’t hurt to add it.
Done; it seems to
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
>> Congratulations! I tried the build and it worked without problem.
>
> How can I try it?
>
> I set the LIBRARY_PATH variable:
>
> export
> LIBRARY_PATH=/nix/store/mifp2p1zjlvb4ndslw1r8grkpglybqjf-glibc-cross-mips64el-linux-gnu-2.17/lib
It should be ‘CROSS_LIBRARY_PA
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
>> This is a known issue: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/33397 . The
>> attached files make w3m buildable.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Can I push the attached patches?
Yes please. Thanks to both of you!
Ludo’.
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
>>> +(copy-file prog prog-real)
>
>> You lack a (chmod prog-real #o755), I think.
>
> Are you sure?
>
> If 'prog' is an executable, 'prog-real' will be an executable too.
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (open-file "foo" "w")
> $1 = #
> scheme@(guile-user)> (chmod "foo" #o7
