Liliana Marie Prikler skribis:
> @Guillaume: From what I can gather from the build error, it appears as
> though the calling convention changed to require an additional
> parameter. I've tracked down the relevant commit [1] and bug [2].
>
> Now obviously doing such a thing violates SemVer, so if
Am Samstag, dem 01.01.2022 um 12:14 -0700 schrieb Jesse Gibbons:
> > What would be the best way to fix this?
> > - keep a mozjs-78.6 package around just for 0ad
> > - patch 0ad to fix the compatibility issues with mozjs 78.15
> > - use the mozjs version bundled in the 0ad sources
> >
> > W
> What would be the best way to fix this?
> - keep a mozjs-78.6 package around just for 0ad
> - patch 0ad to fix the compatibility issues with mozjs 78.15
> - use the mozjs version bundled in the 0ad sources
>
> WDYT?
Keeping mozjs-78.6 just for 0ad will probably make things harder later
on b
The 0ad package checks the version of mozjs and throws an error if it is
not exactly the version it expects. This check is done in
"source/scriptinterface/ScriptTypes.h" and it currently requires version
78.6 of mozjs. As Guix has mozjs 78.15 instead, 0ad fails to build.
Patching "ScriptTypes.h" t
