From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: State of dbus-update Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:41:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20151030144120.GA21444@debian> References: <20151028125844.GA6548@debian> <20151029234732.GB25985@debian> <87a8r034bb.fsf@member.fsf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36984) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZsAs0-0003Rl-1L for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:41:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZsAru-0004EW-DQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:41:31 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:54986) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZsAru-0004ES-6e for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:41:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a8r034bb.fsf@member.fsf.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 08:54:00PM +0800, 宋文武 wrote: > As mention in the report, pass '--disable-egl' do the trick, thanks for > the information! I was not quite sure if this flag did not disable too much; but probably it simply disables things that have been removed. So if its dependencies still build, this should be the good fix for now. > after this fix, I merge master into dbus-update. > Do you think it's time to merge back? Yes, I think so. On my list, only lablgtk remains. I added it at some point in time because it is needed for the graphical version of unison (gtk+ bindings for ocaml). But building unison with gtk+ requires more, and in the meantime I got used to the command line version of unison. Maybe now we should first wait for the dbus-update branch to build after the master merge (which hopefully will not take too long), and then merge back? > Sorry for all the trouble I made.. No problem! I think it would have been more efficient to advance by smaller steps. But altogether, we have made a big step forward, and your enthusiasm for updating complicated packages is much appreciated. Cheers, Andreas