help broken configure scripts #93

New Issue

ariadne · 2016-08-02T07:19:52Z

0-wiz-0 commented

2016-08-02 07:19:52 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Since the pkg-config version has been 0.9.0 for ages, people have been writing tests expecting the version number to be in that format.
The latest pkgconf release, 1, just returns "1" as version number, which breaks some of these (unwarranted) expectations. This breaks e.g. compilation of lilypond.
Can you please make it return version '1.0.0' instead?

Since the pkg-config version has been 0.9.0 for ages, people have been writing tests expecting the version number to be in that format. The latest pkgconf release, 1, just returns "1" as version number, which breaks some of these (unwarranted) expectations. This breaks e.g. compilation of lilypond. Can you please make it return version '1.0.0' instead?

ariadne commented

2016-08-02 18:12:43 +00:00

lilypond upstream is already fixing the issue. i rather fix the unwarranted expectations in other packages. do you have a list of regressions?

we tested this change with freebsd ports tinderbox about a year ago and didn't observe any other breakage than lilypond.

lilypond upstream is already fixing the issue. i rather fix the unwarranted expectations in other packages. do you have a list of regressions? we tested this change with freebsd ports tinderbox about a year ago and didn't observe any other breakage than lilypond.

0-wiz-0 commented

2016-08-02 19:44:21 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I haven't found any other yet, and since you say lilypond is fixed, let's just fix the others too.

Sign in to join this conversation.