[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Release 3.0.1 Unofficial Tarballs
From: |
Berndt Josef Wulf |
Subject: |
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Release 3.0.1 Unofficial Tarballs |
Date: |
Thu, 9 Nov 2006 19:00:11 +1030 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.4 |
G'day Johnathan,
Ok, they are forming part of the distribution, but I've never seen and
obviously never missed them until now.
I didn't create a pkgsrc distribution for version 3.0 since it had other
problems that needed to be overcome and my working schedule was very tight at
that time. Hence I'm pretty keen to see this through the door as its been
awhile since pkgsrc was updated.
I now see that these files are in the SVN repository. Not sure how to deal
with this as such. Perhaps skip 3.0.1 and release 3.0.2 as the next official
release?
cheerio Berndt
On Thursday 09 November 2006 17:38, you wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 18:03 +1030, Berndt Josef Wulf wrote:
> > It appars that those ending with _vXX are nolonger part of the
> > distribution and may be a leftover from earlier distribution - old
> > skeletons? :-)
>
> Actually, those ending in vXX are part of the source tree and are
> supposed to be in the distribution tarball. The bug is not referring to
> them in one particular place in the Makefile.am so they get included.
>
> I am the guilty party here--I added those 'vector' operations to the
> tree as one of the first contributions I ever made to GNU Radio, and
> clearly didn't know what I was doing. It's a wonder Eric lets me near
> the tree sometimes :-)
>
> But--did pkgsrc ever work for you, say, in the release 3.0 tarballs?
> This bug has been there since the CVS days.
>
> Anyway, it's easy to fix, but we've got to huddle and figure out what it
> means as far as the release goes. Unfortunately, we already tagged
> 3.0.1 in the repository off the release branch. We could delete that
> tag, and re-tag the release branch after checking in that fix. It would
> (almost) be as if this broken 3.0.1 never existed.
>
> Some would call this cheating, others would call it clever.