[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Please don't non-bugs in changelog (again)

On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 03:28:25AM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 06:16:05PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > 
> > No changes made to the package, so these bugs should *not* be closed in
> > the changelog.  Instead, send a mail to bugnumber-close@bugs.d.o or
> > bugnumber-done@b.d.o noting why you're closing the bug.
> I'm not sure that you have to slam him for having a bit screwed up
> changelog but I'll have to for having really fucked up 
> packages. I mean, com on. Before releasing a library of this size,
> one should really check not only that it compiles but also that
> all the programs work.
> I mean, is it so difficult to try to compile the examlpes? I mean,
> going into the hello directory in the examples and typing
> qmake hello
> make
> check if it compiles and runs?
> This is redicules. I might expect that there might be a missing file
> somewhere to some obscure utility or something but to have
> core utilities like qmake crap out... well.. do I really have to
> say more??
> I really believe that a maintainer of something like Qt really
> needs to be using it on day to day basis. Imagine what libc, gcc or 
> xfree86 would look like if maintainers of those packages were not
> using them.
> - Adam
> > ---
> > My secret to happiness... is that I have a heart of a 12-year-old boy.
> > It's over here in a jar.  Would you like to see it?
> lol
> Off to sleep - I have to wait for old Qt packages to recompile with
> GCC 3.2 (a few hours)

2 things:

   1)  copy the mkspecs dir to /usr/share/mkspecs  (from your source tree)
   2)  Make sure your qmake environment varialbes are set.  (Check the Readme)

this should save you the few hours of building.


Ivan E. Moore II
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD

Reply to: