Re: Automatic compilation: results
Do you have all the development packages installed? I found several
packages in your list that I managed to build without changing anything.
Anyway, I'll be glad to have a look at the output of the build process for
some packages (marked below) to figure out what's wrong with them.
On Saturday, 29 Nov, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I'd start uploading them to master, but a) I don't yet know if the
> PGP signatures will be accepted by the upload handling automation,
> and b) I don't even know if the packages are OK (no-one's responded
> to my question about the info package I uploaded to beezer :-).
I would add c) some packages on master contain (reported) bugfixes which
may not be incorporated yet in the source package. However, I don't
think it will cause any harm if you upload those packages that do not
present on master at all.
> I don't have time to go through all failed builds, but I'll
> attach the list below (sorry about the length), and will gladly
> respond to queries about the output of the build process that
> my script saves.
OK, can I have the following, please:
(this guy was reported twice for some reason)
Some general comments.
1. tcl and tk packages must be built in a certain sequence (I don't
remember which), and the unpacked and built tree of the first package
must be available when the second package is being built. (I hope
your script can handle this.)
2. These packages are irrelevant for Alpha:
Should a bug against their architecture specification be reported?
3. The menu package
cannot be compiled by gcc on Alpha. Egcs is required, so we may relax
with this for a while (there should be a hand-built menu binary on master).
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .