On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2007-02-05T10:00:34, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Could someone check it and apply it, please? Thanks.
>
> Hi David,
>
> thanks, I've applied it.
Many thanks, Lars. (And many thanks to Andrew also for looking into it.)
--
: D
On 2/5/07, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:10:58PM +, David Lee wrote:
> > [...]
> > For this particular bug, the fundamental question is "is SWIG now
> > absolutely compulsory?" If so, then configure should scream to a hal
On 2007-02-05T10:00:34, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could someone check it and apply it, please? Thanks.
Hi David,
thanks, I've applied it.
> (Do we still need the large block of (defunct?) dnl-commented SWIG-related
> code in 'configure.in' at about line 2600?)
No. I'm doing a tes
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:10:58PM +, David Lee wrote:
> > [...]
> > For this particular bug, the fundamental question is "is SWIG now
> > absolutely compulsory?" If so, then configure should scream to a halt if
> > swig is absent. If not, then "lib/mgmt"
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:10:58PM +, David Lee wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>
> > On 2007-01-31T10:40:34, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > These days, all that is commented out, so configure runs to completion,
> > > then 'make' falls in a heap in "lib
On 2007-01-31T12:10:58, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I could try that. But my perspective isn't "getting it to work just for
> me". Rather it is "ensuring it will work for all the end-users out there,
> of which I happen to be one example".
Sure, I didn't suggest anything else. But to
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Peter Clapham wrote:
> David Lee wrote:
> > [...]
> > (Incidentally, part of what I do here on "linux-ha-dev" over the years is
> > ensure, as a general principle, that heartbeat has a reasonable chance of
> > building and running on other OSes and in a range of environments.
David Lee wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Peter Clapham wrote:
I know it possibly isn't a direction you would choose to follow but FWIW
there is a sunfreeware swig package available (Intel/Sparc ). Although I
agree that it would be more helpful if it is a compilation dependency
for things to fai
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Peter Clapham wrote:
> I know it possibly isn't a direction you would choose to follow but FWIW
> there is a sunfreeware swig package available (Intel/Sparc ). Although I
> agree that it would be more helpful if it is a compilation dependency
> for things to fail at the config
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2007-01-31T10:40:34, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > These days, all that is commented out, so configure runs to completion,
> > then 'make' falls in a heap in "lib/mgmt" when it can't find swig. Ouch!
>
> You might have success if yo
David Lee wrote:
After months of not pestering, I'm back... with added mercurial.
I'm trying to build the current "dev" on a system (Solaris) that has no
"swig". And (guess what) a problem.
In the old days, "swig" used to be optional; "configure" had it as a "try"
(meaning desirable if availab
On 2007-01-31T10:40:34, David Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These days, all that is commented out, so configure runs to completion,
> then 'make' falls in a heap in "lib/mgmt" when it can't find swig. Ouch!
You might have success if you build without the GUI; it is built by
default, but requi
After months of not pestering, I'm back... with added mercurial.
I'm trying to build the current "dev" on a system (Solaris) that has no
"swig". And (guess what) a problem.
In the old days, "swig" used to be optional; "configure" had it as a "try"
(meaning desirable if available; warn-and-contin
13 matches
Mail list logo
