On 2019/11/01 17:18:34, Dan Eble wrote:
On 2019/10/29 19:38:23, Carl wrote:
> My bottom line is that the current system is definitely broken.
Yes, and the thing that bugs me most is that it reallocates memory per
candidate, for no benefit.
> I will look into my code tonight when I get home
On 2019/10/29 19:38:23, Carl wrote:
My bottom line is that the current system is definitely broken.
Yes, and the thing that bugs me most is that it reallocates memory per
candidate, for no benefit.
I will look into my code tonight when I get home and see how I
handled the "best" issue.
If
On Nov 1, 2019, at 02:52, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
>>> [...] because the `share' tree present in
>>>
>>> gub/uploads/webtest/v2.21.0-1-unpack/v2.19.83-1/
>>>
>>> is not created by the script in
>>>
>>> gub/uploads/webtest/v2.21.0-1-unpack/v2.21.0-1/
>>
>> This fixes the lilypond-test stage:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 5:12 AM Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
>
> > When I run configure, an error is returned saying that makeinfo is
> > too old (5,2). When I run sudo apt-get install texinfo, I'm told
> > that I have the latest version. makeinfo --version still returns
> > 5.2.
>
> Ouch.
> When I run configure, an error is returned saying that makeinfo is
> too old (5,2). When I run sudo apt-get install texinfo, I'm told
> that I have the latest version. makeinfo --version still returns
> 5.2.
Ouch. `makeinfo` is part of texinfo. Version 5.2 was published
September 2013!
>> [...] because the `share' tree present in
>>
>> gub/uploads/webtest/v2.21.0-1-unpack/v2.19.83-1/
>>
>> is not created by the script in
>>
>> gub/uploads/webtest/v2.21.0-1-unpack/v2.21.0-1/
>
> This fixes the lilypond-test stage:
> https://github.com/gperciva/gub/pull/70
Thanks a lot! What
