On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 11:52:28PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> That should've been _AS_DETECT_REQUIRED instead of _AS_DETECT_SUGGESTED,
> sorry.
Thank you.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reassign 447022 fakeroot 1.9.2
quit
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That should've been _AS_DETECT_REQUIRED instead of _AS_DETECT_SUGGESTED,
sorry.
2008-02-05 Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* configure.ac: Do not override $SHELL late in configure.ac.
Use undocumented Autoconf interface _AS_DETECT_REQUIRED to
require $(...) command r
* Clint Adams wrote on Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 08:19:22PM CET:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:59:46PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Let's find out what the differences in the setups are. Which version
> > of dash? Which m4 and autoconf versions were used to bootstrap the
> > package in question?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 08:48:10PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Please note that 2.1a+cvs1.2525+20071016-1 is the latest version in
> experimental.
Thanks. fakeroot 1.9.2 is generated with libtool
2.1a+cvs1.2525+20071016-1 and appears to suffer from the same problem.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:19:22PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:59:46PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Let's find out what the differences in the setups are. Which version
> > of dash? Which m4 and autoconf versions were used to bootstrap the
> > package in question?
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:59:46PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Let's find out what the differences in the setups are. Which version
> of dash? Which m4 and autoconf versions were used to bootstrap the
> package in question? BTW, which package is this that this happened
> with, libtool or som
* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:59:46PM CET:
> * Clint Adams wrote on Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:43:22PM CET:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:44:30PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > In my failing test case, I have /bin/sh in both these places, not
> > > /bin/bash.
> >
> > Same here
* Clint Adams wrote on Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:43:22PM CET:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:44:30PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > In my failing test case, I have /bin/sh in both these places, not
> > /bin/bash.
>
> Same here.
Let's find out what the differences in the setups are. Which version
of
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:44:30PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> In my failing test case, I have /bin/sh in both these places, not
> /bin/bash.
Same here. I will note that a ./config.status --recheck
seems to "fix" things.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubsc
* Colin Watson wrote on Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:44:30PM CET:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:18:08PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> > Actually, the generated libtool script should just have
> > #! /bin/bash
> >
> > as its first line, and not re-exececute itself at all.
> >
> > OK, let's go s
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:18:08PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> [ http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=447022 aka.
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.bugs/5879/focus=342902 ]
>
> Hello, and sorry for the long delay.
>
> * Clint Adams wrote on Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02
[ http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=447022 aka.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.bugs/5879/focus=342902 ]
Hello, and sorry for the long delay.
* Clint Adams wrote on Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 02:39:36AM CET:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 01:59:34AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 01:59:34AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> libtool used it. The _LT_CHECK_SHELL_FEATURES macro checks a number of
> shell features and determines accurately that the currently-running
> shell supports +=. Unfortunately, the currently-running shell is bash at
> this point, not d
14 matches
Mail list logo
