From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kei Kebreau Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add qscintilla. Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:40:37 -0400 Message-ID: <878tuvd1vu.fsf@openmailbox.org> References: <87a8fddnyi.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87r38ndfwb.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160913170529.GD20731@jasmine> <87k2efd6gy.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160913181404.GA4295@jasmine> <87fup3d3sc.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160913190412.GB5986@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47581) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjtZZ-0000nG-HV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:40:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjtZU-0004A9-5X for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:40:48 -0400 Received: from smtp11.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.45]:49727) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bjtZT-00049k-Of for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:40:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160913190412.GB5986@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:04:12 -0400") 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" To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Leo Famulari writes: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:59:31PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: >> Leo Famulari writes: >>=20 >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:01:33PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: >> >> Like below? And how could I then access qscintilla-for-octave from >> >> maths.scm if it isn't defined publicly? >> > >> > Yes, that looks right. But I would put qscintilla-for-octave in >> > maths.scm to avoid the issue you describe. >>=20 >> So would you say that this is clean enough that I could push both of >> these changes in their respecitive files before modifying the Octave def= inition? > > I would wait to push the Qt 4 variant until you have made sure it works > with Octave. I have Octave successfully running with a GUI on my machine using the Qt 4 version of the QScintilla patch, though I've yet to test with the qscintilla-for-octave package. > > Also, I didn't notice a difference between the arguments for each > package variant. If there is no difference, could the Qt 4 variant > inherit the arguments, too? There is a small difference in the two fix-Makefiles phases. They replace different folder paths (the Qt 5 version changes the qtbase path to the package output path, the Qt 4 version changes the qt-4 path to the package output path). --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJX2FY1AAoJEOal7jwZRnoNtrUQALeZAJrLeECH2KEaRisyPs7j oY379OSAJrMriNOI0PJD+VQWlw3w2A9fHsgTEbhipNgHua748heJf5iYzUhk/Jhv uNa+kIiPMasMcdqc8geSoVXFjX3nUI59T+17lJm7SIqMKGq9Y6viotDjglqT8p1b FL6pvR7cbSBnOoDvg20E08fkY+GoFvTK1KBIRFdb7/nH5c/R/ApVCMrTX5G+6Jxw pBXZBgwM0HZZB0Oq04lCsBqHjU7SEUHbLVFma0J+CqT34+32EMnen8N1qQoRAWmN zGVdG4IHHM3Yt7DOKZ7AoOGRf2wIx+C1aXrOLy07qVhzgqyxyaYaIQatn1dR0HXx EjtnIYksoMJg5ag2Pks1f0XoTySTlfuNTiMAK6hB7leOta5nBBRJGCl3Xshyso79 Z4fFqNpdA1Ai8mnDN4KK/vlf9b8bPFw1s5aVz9a+bdMH28xRYDPUae6GukOyCCA0 f6JkUcQXmDRDLsHSIZtBTbLnWfs9YTlR9RnD+ILWIZvftrQOdH3Ik96pzZ3d9GQ1 mawddfErP91OI6sdcUkX+SKiDBezSRD8Mz7Fx2NAHQUdFjNNbk8afglLS44wnqCG jlvskmiUuDXqhWsYjilu4GAKaJDTH6Ot0+u9wiEr0xGUDgQ7H0UbJetumG2pHNxo MQaErl47jSAXEIk3Urln =cbIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--