[Slackbuilds-users] Patch for libmp4v2
niels.horn at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 10:50:35 UTC 2010
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:27 AM, Eugéne Suter <easuter at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'll make future reports more detailed, sorry.
> Yeah, I'm running 64bit -current.
> On 28 January 2010 04:10, <xgizzmo at slackbuilds.org> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 27 January 2010 22:50:45 Eugéne Suter wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>> Today I was trying to install libmp4v2 and the build failed. I have a
>>> patch attached for the code and one for the SlackBuild.
>> Based on the patch it looks like you are running -current, nothing wrong with
>> that but if you are you need to state that the patch is needed for -current.
>> If not ignore me.
>> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
>> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
>> Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
>> FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
Since we're on the subject, what would be reasonable in these cases?
What if a SlackBuild needs patches for -current?
I know SlackBuilds.org supports 13.0-stable only officially, but is it
OK to mention a patch in README if needed? Or create a README.CURRENT
if there are special instructions?
Or (tell me if I'm going too far) let the SlackBuild check the version
of gcc (usually the problem with building on -current) version and
apply the patch?
Sometimes (mostly?) a patch for -current will not cause any
side-effects on -stable and build normally on the "older" gcc. In this
case I guess we can apply the patch anyway (I confess I already did
this in one build)
More information about the SlackBuilds-users