Patching 1.13?

Martin Pool mbp at sourcefrog.net
Wed Mar 18 01:13:48 GMT 2009


2009/3/18 Robert Collins <robert.collins at canonical.com>:
> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 19:21 -0500, Bob Tanner wrote:
>> On Mar 17, 2009, at 6:18 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> >> On the other hand, the 1.13 tarball also doesn't include the
>> >> pyrex-ified .c files, so [unless the person building has pyrex
>> >> around]
>> >> the only C extension being built is patiencediff.
>> >
>> > We should spin 13.1 then, this counts as a regression :(.
>>
>>
>> Can a testsuite be written to prevent this from happening again?
>
> It could be but would be very expensive. The root cause is us requiring
> a special step during distribution thats not automated robustly; we're
> going to start versioning the .c files anyway, which will go a long way
> to preventing it.

I thought that we already failed the build unless you passed a special
option to allow running without the extensions, so I'm surprised that
this got through.  At any rate once we check in the C files we should
make sure that's in place if someone happens to get a checkout without
them..

-- 
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>



More information about the bazaar mailing list