Daniel Hartwig writes:
> Not really related to your build failure, but now that the docs do not
> need to be separated I really think you should use the upstream
> tarball for packaging.
I may eventually, but if I do, I can't nearly as easily cherry-pick
patches, or update to a new release.
It'
On 16 June 2013 02:06, Rob Browning wrote:
>
> It looks like the newer libgc is headed for unstable, and I'm working on
> the Debian packages for 2.0.9, where I've run into a couple of problems.
>
> The first might be a problem caused by my packaging, but in case not,
> the build from git fails be
Rob Browning skribis:
> $ strace -f -p ./foo
> ...
> 27725 open("/lib/libnss_mdns4.so.2", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
> 27725 read(3,
> "\177ELF\2\1\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\3\0>\0\1\0\0\0\340\v\0\0\0\0\0\0"..., 832) =
> 832
> 27725 fstat(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=10880, ...}) = 0
>
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> guile.info normally doesn’t need to be built when using the tarball.
> However, this wasn’t the case until a9ea4f909b9970c755b0a7c4cd9da907e66496fc.
Right. I was asking about the case of building from git -- there I'm
using ./autogen.sh. Is that not suff
Rob Browning skribis:
> The first might be a problem caused by my packaging, but in case not,
> the build from git fails because doc/ref/effective-version.texi doesn't
> exist when it tries to build guile.info.
guile.info normally doesn’t need to be built when using the tarball.
However, this wa
It looks like the newer libgc is headed for unstable, and I'm working on
the Debian packages for 2.0.9, where I've run into a couple of problems.
The first might be a problem caused by my packaging, but in case not,
the build from git fails because doc/ref/effective-version.texi doesn't
exist whe
