In message <E1Evet0-0004WP-00@mnementh.archaic.org.uk>,
pmaydell@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes:
OK, I've done some testing and the results are:
Successful compile:
Linux/x86 Debian stable (sarge)
Linux/x86 Fedora FC2
Solaris/SPARC
Linux/AMD64
NetBSD
Fine!!!
(I didn't actually test the binaries, just that they could be built.)
I can test the binaries on NetBSD for some days if you agree...
Failure:
OpenBSD/x86: I tried the sourceforge compile farm OpenBSD box, and it
built OK except that it screwed up on the makefile in the man/ directory
by trying to build manpages before man.sed (despite the dependency rule
directing otherwise). It's not a simple GNU-makeism (because NetBSD works
fine). So I propose to ignore this as a bug in that make unless somebody
submits a patch and rationale.
Agreed. I would suggest asking for some help in a OpenBSD mailing list
or newsgroup. Perhaps it is a bug in OpenBSD's make.
I think the problems Igor was having are because the makefile rules for
rerunning autoconf were kicking in (perhaps a clock skew problem between
the machine he ran autoconf on and the one he ran make on?). Anyway, GNU
autoconf requires GNU m4 (no avoiding that) but a proper release tarball
including a configure script should have no problems.
Agreed. I made the fixed tarball in a machine in Spain and transferred
it to a machine in the United States. "make" should use GMT as universal
time reference but, even in this case, both machines can have a delay
longer than the time required to transfer/unpack/build the new binary.
The machine in Asturias has certainly a delay as it is not using NTP now.
So I think we could go ahead and roll out a point release.
It's fine for me. I will not complain, though. ;-)
Cheers,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers