Re: Gnumeric build problems

[jgotts linuxsavvy com]

In message <20010913103920 A13823 indonesia kscanners no>, Toralf Lund writes:

>Actually, it looks like there is a problem with the commands in %install
>rather than the spec file as such. I'm quite sure 'make install' leaves out
>some bits, but I haven't yet been able to figure out why. (I'm working on
>it right now.)

Ok, feel free to report your findings to the gnumeric mailing list
(gnumeric-list gnome org).  I'm not personally aware of anything left out by
the "make install" process, but there was one small glitch in the CVS tree a
couple of months ago that was fixed before the next release.  

>I'm glad to hear that you support RPM, it seems to me that many other
>package maintainers don't. Oh, yes, .spec files are included on most source
>trees, but how often are they *used*? Well, I shouldn't expect binary
>releases to be tested for arbitrary checkouts of development versions, I
>suppose, but what I do expect is that someone continually ensures the tree
>is complete and consistent, and building/installing RPMs is a very nice
>test in conjunction with this!

I'm doing what I can to merge my changes back into GNOME CVS, but I only have a
limited amount of time to do so given job constraints.

John

-- 
John GOTTS <jgotts linuxsavvy com>  http://linuxsavvy.com/staff/jgotts