l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> taylanbayi...@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
>
>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>
>>>> + (uri (string-append "http://www.leptonica.com/source/leptonica-";
>>>> + version ".tar.gz"))
>>>
>>> Really, they didn’t use ‘make dist’?
>>
>> I don't understand; what does make dist do differently?
>
> A tarball generated by ‘make dist’ (like most tarballs of GNU packages)
> already has a ‘configure’ script and Makefile templates; thus it doesn’t
> depend on Autoconf, Automake, etc.
>
> However, this package recipe explicitly adds Autoconf, Automake, and
> Libtool as inputs, plus it runs ‘autoreconf’. So I suspect this is
> because upstream’s tarball isn’t self-contained, right?
>
> Ludo’.
Oh, I did that because otherwise I get the following at start of the
build phase:
(CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . &&
/gnu/store/nq6idcqwqc9x6z7g9jxq11a58jqx6w8x-bash-4.3.33/bin/bash
/tmp/nix-build-leptonica-1.71.drv-1/leptonica-1.71/config/missing --run
autoheader)
aclocal.m4:17: warning: this file was generated for autoconf 2.68.
You have another version of autoconf. It may work, but is not guaranteed to.
If you have problems, you may need to regenerate the build system entirely.
To do so, use the procedure documented by the package, typically `autoreconf'.
However, it seems to build fine in the end. Should I remove the
autoreconf phase?
Taylan
