[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] make dist failed

At 06/13/2012 12:10 PM, Eric Blake Wrote:
> On 06/12/2012 09:07 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
>>> We really shouldn't need to compile a file for a virgin 'make dist' to
>>> work, but now I have enough information to repeat it.  It may be a while
>>> before I have a clean solution, though, since every thing I try implies
>>> nuking my tree and starting from a fresh clone module my patch attempt.
> I now have 'make dist' works; if it also passes the longer 'make
> distcheck' on a virgin tree, then I will push my patch under the
> build-breaker rule (patch in separate mail).  The bug was that we had a
> file in the tarball that depended on a generated file, which is a no-no.
>  We really need to ship remote_protocol-structs, and we also want 'make
> check' to ensure that file is up-to-date (which includes a dependency on
> a generated file), but a little bit of refactoring makes it so that
> 'make check' need not interfere with 'make dist', by having the two
> targets depend on different names.

I apply your patch, and the problem does not exist.

Wen Congyang

>>>> I revert some commits and test the building. I find that this problem is
>>>> introduced by the commit 7bff56a0d1514cb955eb14adc14281626e80e96c.
>>> That was fixing real bugs, but I'm not surprised that other latent bugs
>>> were exposed in the process.
>> Yes, that commit fixes a bug, but introduce a new bug.
> Not a new bug, but a latent one.  The bug has been present since July
> 2011 (commit 62dee6f), but it was the refactoring of commit 7bff56a that
> exposed it better.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]