bzr-1.15final released

[Martin Pool]

2009/5/28 Bob Tanner <tanner at real-time.com>:
>
> On May 28, 2009, at 2:30 AM, Martin Pool wrote:
>
>> I think the policy is supposed to be that you can run 'make' in the
>> source directory without the .c files, but you can't 'make dist'
>> without them.  However, perhaps we should just remove the fallbacks,
>> check in the .c files (as Robert recently suggested) and then require
>> that you have pyrex if you change the files.
>>
>
> I did follow the releasing doc.
>
> I issued a 'make dist' and a 'make check-dist-tarball' both succeeded.
>
> Does something need to be added to the release doc or are you saying removing the fallbacks should solve the issue?

I'm saying that as you followed the instructions and the .c files were
not included (as seems to be the case) then there is a bug.  Either
you don't have pyrex (in which case the build should fail rather than
being incomplete) or there's some other bug.

>> Actually installing from the tarball is supposed to fail unless you
>> have a C compiler unless you pass --allow-python-fallback.
>
> Meaning, even if the the pyrexified files are not in the tarball they get created when installing from the tarball?

Well, it's true that if you installed from the tarball and there were
no .c files (which should never happen) and you have pyrex then
they'll be created at that point.  However what I meant is that the C
compiler, which turns the .c files into .so (or similar) must be
present to install bzr unless you specifically say it's ok to use the
slower python implementations.

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