Richard Laager said:
> NTPsec's `waf configure --destdir` seems broken. That should be fixed,
> especially if helping packagers is a priority.
--destdir work on install rather than configure.
--prefix works on configure not install
That doesn't seem obvious to me, but that stuff is probably abo
On 12/07/2017 10:59 PM, Gary E. Miller wrote:
>> The default case is prefix=/usr/local, which (correct me if I'm wrong)
>> works without hacks.
>
> Sadly, recently broken.
NTPsec has wafhelpers/fix_python_config.py, which is the hack in question.
Have you tried the patch I posted to #414, which
> And worse, SOME of my install goes in /usr, some in /usr/local. It should
> be all one, or all the other.
./waf configure --prefix=foo
says
PREFIX: /home/murray/ntpsec/raw/foo
After ./waf build, ./waf install says:
WafError: Could not install the file
'/usr/lib/p
Yo Richard!
Uh, sorry, I've been offline with the grunge.
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 20:22:48 -0600
Richard Laager via devel wrote:
> On 12/07/2017 03:06 PM, Fred Wright via devel wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Ian Bruene via devel wrote:
> >
> >> For installs the only remaining problem is that for
On 12/07/2017 03:06 PM, Fred Wright via devel wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Ian Bruene via devel wrote:
>
>> For installs the only remaining problem is that for unknown reasons it
>> sometimes doesn't follow the PREFIX when installing the python libs.
>
> There's nothing "unknown" about it.
Actua
Hal Murray :
> Even with something like a simple bug fix, some are easy to test and very
> unlikely to break anything else and some can't be tested by the fixer and
> some have potential to break something else.
That is so. I could live with a sytem that made some sensible distinctions
along th
Jason Azze via devel :
> Everyone pushes commits to a single working branch.
> These commits are built and tested by the CI automation.
> IFF the code builds and tests pass then the CI system auto-merges with
> the master branch.
> If an auto-merge isn't possible, it gets bounced to a human for int
>> How important is your individual way of doing things? Would you
>> be willing to tolerate some inconvenience if that made the rest of us
>> more productive?
> In principle, yes. I'd need to be persuaded that the net was positive -
> that the rest of you got sped up more than I got slowed down
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Ian Bruene via devel wrote:
> For installs the only remaining problem is that for unknown reasons it
> sometimes doesn't follow the PREFIX when installing the python libs.
There's nothing "unknown" about it. This has been discussed at length on
this ML, as well as being expl
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Selsky via devel
wrote:
> We also don't have formal code reviews (before commit) since many devs push
> directly to "master". So we can't enforce any policies to code before they
> get committed to master.
>
> At some point, maybe soonish, can we stop pu
On 12/07/2017 07:43 AM, Eric S. Raymond via devel wrote:
How important is your individual way of doing things? Would you be willing
to tolerate some inconvenience if that made the rest of us more productive?
In principle, yes. I'd need to be persuaded that the net was positive -
that the res
Hal Murray :
>
> >> How many of your changes need to actually hit the repo in less than 24
> hours?
> > Depends on whether you think rapidly clearing bugs is important. I do.
>
> Why is that important? My 24 hours was a guess at the long tail. Who is
> going to notice if you fix a bug but it
>> How many of your changes need to actually hit the repo in less than 24
hours?
> Depends on whether you think rapidly clearing bugs is important. I do.
Why is that important? My 24 hours was a guess at the long tail. Who is
going to notice if you fix a bug but it doesn't appear in HEAD unt
13 matches
Mail list logo
