On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:03:04 -0600 Derek Foreman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/02/15 09:22 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > On 2015-02-10 03:15, Bryce Harrington wrote: > >> Turns out the issue I've run into is that the --with-xserver-path > >> setting doesn't get passed down into distcheck, which calls > >> configure like this: > >> > >> && $(am__cd) $(distdir)/_build \ > >> && ../configure \ > >> $(AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS) \ > >> $(DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS) \ > >> --srcdir=.. --prefix="$$dc_install_base" \ > >> && $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) \ > >> > >> Setting --with-xserver-path in AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS > >> doesn't seem to work (it ends up confusing config.sub mightily), > >> but setting it in DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS seems to produce valid > >> results. > > > > DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS is for user-defined distcheck flags, you > > must not define in your Makefile.am. I would rather find what is > > going on with AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS, any log to share? > > > > Actually, I think DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS is exactly what Bryce > wants to use for this. > > Bryce has Xwayland installed in a non-standard location so as to not > interfere with his system binaries, so we don't want anything in > Makefile.am to be specific to his installation anyway. > > DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS=--with-xserver-path=/wherever/it/is/Xwayland > make distcheck > > should make the test pass just fine, and I think it's reasonable to > expect that without any good way to detect Xwayland's location. > > FWIW, I still think the patch that started this thread is worthwhile, > though. :) Totally agreed; so we'd not use DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS in Makefile.am, but mention it in releasing.txt instead for the person to set it according to his own system. Thanks, pq _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
