On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> 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 :)
Heh. Yes, I'm getting interrupted socially, not by network.
>> 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?
RHEL 4 and 5 require the sqlite-amalgamation package, due to their
out-of-date sqlite. I'm stuffing in hooks to extract the tarball
referenced by the 'configure' process, and put it at
'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?
They're in the .spec files. The ones in RPMforge, and many other
locations, are a bit strange about using such a hook and then ignoring
it to automatically extract and use the swig-1.3.39 package.
>> then removed all effect of them and simply
>> included the swig tarball anyway.
>
> Which affects you in what way?
It leaves confusing debris in the .spec file. If you're going to not
use the provided swig component, set up the .spec file so it doesn't
extract the tarball, don't just skip the final swig 'build' step. That
can be done with something like this
%prep
%setup
# Extract swig on its own
%{!?_without_swig:%setup -D -T -a 10}
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2332062
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-05-20 18:08:57 CEST