On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 07:20:22PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 07:38:44AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> >> I'm trying to get Subversion 1.6.x into RPMforge, and I've got to say,
> >> the requirement for such a recent Python is fairly burdensome. From some
> >> testing, it's apparently only needed for the compilation, not for the
> >> actual operation of Subversion.
> >>
> >> I understand how that can happen: whoever wrote those bits has an
> >> up-to-date development environment. But it would be helpful if we could
> >> scale back that requirement a bit: it only occurred with 1.6.0, and
> >> wasn't there for 1.5.6. Ws that really necessary, in revision *35307*
> >> <http://svn.collab.net/viewvc/svn?view=revision&revision=35307>? Can it
> >> be gracefully scaled back to only require 2.3.4, which will ease RHEL 4
> >> compilation considerably?
> >>
> >
> > Nico,
> >
> > can you elaborate on what problems you are facing exactly?
> >
> I can't compile on RHEL 4, even if I rollback the tests for python-2.4
> or greater to 2.3. Arfrever's reply seems correct that
There seems to be something missing from the mail here.
You forgot CARRIER LOST or something to that effect :)
> The SRPM's have a bunch of small patches, in particular to integrate
> sqlite-amalgamation (which is one of the factors I'm trying to resolve).
OK. And what exactly is the problem with the sqlite-amalgamation?
> I'd also like to have a gentle word with the smart aleck who put in the
> 'without_swig' settings,
Where were without_swig settings being put into?
> then removed all effect of them and simply
> included the swig tarball anyway.
Which affects you in what way?
Stefan
Received on 2009-05-20 12:34:20 CEST