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

Re: help needed with mips build failure

On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 01:02:58PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

> > Clearly not, or it wouldn't have failed to build on mips and mipsel.  There
> > is nothing "perfectly working" about that version of libtool, and moreover,
> > its effects are not limited to the mips architectures -- as the obscenely
> > long list of library dependencies of the gnucash package are almost
> > certainly also caused by use of this old, buggy version of libtool.

> I'm pretty sure that the upstream sources build on ordinary mips
> distributions, but I'm not certain of this.

Considering Debian is the only mainstream desktop distribution with a mips
port, and gnucash upstream has in the past disavowed all responsibility for
compatibility with non-i386 archs, this seems laughably false.  Also,
there's the fact that we've been dealing with this failure of libtool 1.4 to
build working shared libs on mips for years, as evidenced by the fact that
there *is* a boilerplate response, and no one made the problem up out of
whole cloth...

> Perhaps mips is so rare that they wouldn't get bug reports.

Infinitely more likely. :)

> > Let me know if you would like help updating this package to use libtool 1.5
> > (and preferably getting that change pushed upstream).  This probably
> > requires updating to autoconf2.5 at the same time, but should not require
> > changing the version of automake you're using.

> If someone were to present me with suitable patches, I would gladly
> and happily send them upstream.  I don't really have the time to work
> on it myself; I have just sent a message to the upstread development
> list suggesting that the next release should use current tools, and
> I'll see what they say.  Perhaps the release manager there is happy to
> do it.

Ok, I'll take a look at getting a libtool 1.5 update together for you.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: