From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Various Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:38:20 +0100 Message-ID: <87r3scdjcz.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87sicx2qqz.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87384t2v40.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87k2y5t465.fsf@gnu.org> <87lhik27kt.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <87twx8iz8i.fsf@gnu.org> <878uek22o5.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yb73M-0006RL-SY for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:38:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yb73G-0005JD-GR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:38:28 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43595) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yb73G-0005J8-Cb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:38:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <878uek22o5.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> ("Taylan Ulrich \=\?utf-8\?Q\?\=5C\=22Bay\=C4\=B1rl\=C4\=B1\=2FKammer\=5C\=22\=22's\?\= message of "Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:22:02 +0100") 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: Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?=22Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1?= =?utf-8?Q?=2FKammer=22?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer") skribis: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer") skrib= is: >> >>> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: >>> >>>>> + (uri (string-append "http://www.leptonica.com/source/leptonic= a-" >>>>> + version ".tar.gz")) >>>> >>>> Really, they didn=E2=80=99t use =E2=80=98make dist=E2=80=99? >>> >>> I don't understand; what does make dist do differently? >> >> A tarball generated by =E2=80=98make dist=E2=80=99 (like most tarballs o= f GNU packages) >> already has a =E2=80=98configure=E2=80=99 script and Makefile templates;= thus it doesn=E2=80=99t >> depend on Autoconf, Automake, etc. >> >> However, this package recipe explicitly adds Autoconf, Automake, and >> Libtool as inputs, plus it runs =E2=80=98autoreconf=E2=80=99. So I susp= ect this is >> because upstream=E2=80=99s tarball isn=E2=80=99t self-contained, right? >> >> Ludo=E2=80=99. > > Oh, I did that because otherwise I get the following at start of the > build phase: > > (CDPATH=3D"${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && /gnu/store/nq6idcqwqc9x6z7g9jxq1= 1a58jqx6w8x-bash-4.3.33/bin/bash /tmp/nix-build-leptonica-1.71.drv-1/lepton= ica-1.71/config/missing --run autoheader) > aclocal.m4:17: warning: this file was generated for autoconf 2.68. This may be because a .ac, .am, or .m4 file is newer than =E2=80=98configur= e=E2=80=99, for instance. Does any of these get patched, which would explain the newer mtime? Can it be worked around by changing that file=E2=80=99s mtime using =E2=80=98set-file-time=E2=80=99 or similar? > You have another version of autoconf. It may work, but is not guaranteed= to. > If you have problems, you may need to regenerate the build system entirel= y. > To do so, use the procedure documented by the package, typically `autorec= onf'. > > However, it seems to build fine in the end. Should I remove the > autoreconf phase? If it=E2=80=99s not needed then yes, definitely. The important thing would= be to remove autoconf, automake, and libtool from the inputs though. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.