On Mon, Aug 17 2015, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:

> On Sun 2015-08-16 21:53:36 +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 16 2015, David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It's becoming a maintenance burden to do anything things with the
>>> crypto glue code twice, once for 2.4 and once for 2.6. I don't have
>>> any 2.4 version available to test on my development machine anymore,
>>> so the 2.4 specific code paths are likely not very well tested.
>>> ---
>>>
>>> I started to rebase the SMIME signature verification patches and got
>>> aggravated at solving the same conflicts twice in every file.
>>>
>>> 2.6.7 is from 2012, so that's a bit newer than some of our
>>> requirements, but I think not so bad. YMMV.
>>
>> Perhaps it is time for me to update to gmime 2.6 in this machine. PITA ;/
>
> Please do, i think gmime 2.4 is really not well-supported upstream any
> more either.

Hmm, it seems I've been using gmime 2.6(.17 -- now updated to .20) a long
time already -- just that `make distclean` does not see that and I've
been looking that part in my build script...

Interestingly when David's changes are pushed I have to edit the distclean
part of my build to find new gmime so it can do that (distclean, that is) 
successfully ;)

IMO it is somewhat akward that `make distclean` executes `./configure`
but that is probably something no-one wants to do anything with...

Tomi

>
>      --dkg
_______________________________________________
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Reply via email to