Am 09.12.2009 um 15:14 schrieb Daniel Macks: > Max sez: >> >> So, do we agree that it would be nice to not "build conflict" with >> ccache? >> >> If so, I'd be willing to investigate making it work without the >> "ccache" and "distcc" build conflicts. For starters, though, I'd like >> to know why this BuildConflict is there in the first place, so that I >> can verify whether my changes actually work. In a quick test, simply >> commenting out the BuildConflicts did not cause any particular build >> issues. The .info file also contains no comments that explain this >> build conflict... > > I have no idea what the specific problem was, or if it is still a > problem. You'll have to dig through the cvs commit-messages. But I > agree that BCon should be a last-resort solution for when env vars, > simple patches, etc can't solve the problem (whatever it is).
CVS logs tell me that Ben added the BC, to quote: ---------------------------- revision 1.8 date: 2007/03/14 19:41:34; author: rangerrick; state: Exp; lines: +1 -0 gettext is ccache/distcc-unfriendly ---------------------------- Unfortunately, this message does not really tell me in which way it is "unfriendly." I haven't been able to find out anything else. Ben, do you remember what prompted you to make this change? If nobody can recall what it was, I think we should remove the BC, and wait for bug reports. If we are lucky, there are none. Otherwise, we can document the issue in the .info file and come up with a fix (in the worst case, re-adding the BC, but this time with a comment explaining it). Bye, Max ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [email protected] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
