From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: python-pycairo in core-updates (Re: core-updates!)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2016 15:12:38 +0200
Message-ID: <87lh1ki3p5.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87d1mxn33e.fsf@gnu.org> <87inwpwq1r.fsf@member.fsf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34215)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bJKiz-0003xu-LA
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 09:12:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bJKiv-0006KG-EF
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 09:12:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87inwpwq1r.fsf@member.fsf.org> (=?utf-8?B?IuWui+aWh+atpiIn?=
	=?utf-8?B?cw==?= message of "Fri, 01 Jul 2016 19:33:52 +0800")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: =?utf-8?B?5a6L5paH5q2m?= <iyzsong@member.fsf.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Hi,

iyzsong@member.fsf.org (=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6) skribis:

> Hi, python-wrapper has a broken `python3-config', which
> output cflags to the wrapper instead of the origin python3,
> leading the build failure of python-pycairo.

So it appears to resolve the CFLAGS it returns relative to its own
argv[0] or /proc/self/exe, right?

Eventually we should fix this and reinstate this commit, but reverting
it was the right thing in the short term.

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.