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
