On Fri, 21.01.11 18:08, Tom Gundersen ([email protected]) wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Lennart Poettering > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 20.01.11 23:08, Dave Reisner ([email protected]) wrote: > > > >> if --disable-gtk is passed, vala is no longer a build dependency. under > >> these conditions, configure should not fail when vala 0.10 is found. > > > > Vala is required only if you build from git. If you build from tarball > > the .c files are pre-generated for you and there is no Vala > > dependency. Your patch hence makes little sense since we write the > > configure script for tarball installs, and you are expected to install > > more stuff if you build from git, including autoconf and automake > > itself, and vala. > > In Arch at the moment, we only have vala 0.10. This is fine for me, as
Kay just lowered the vala requirement form 0.11 to 0.10, since apparently systemd compiles fine with that, too. > I don't care about the vala parts of systemd, so I just removed vala > from my system and systemd from git compiles fine. However, I guess > for other people who might have vala installed for other purposes, it > would make sense to be allowed to build (the non-vala partst of) > systemd from git. > > In other words, why not treat "vala < 0.11" the same way as we treat > "no vala at all" (which I thought was the intention of Dave's patch)? Hmm, no idea? I assumed that was how we treated things. If we don't treat it like that isn't that something that should be fixed in the vala autoconf macros? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
