On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:44:43PM +0100, Mattias Ellert wrote: > tis 2013-12-10 klockan 12:18 -0500 skrev Darryl L. Pierce: > > > > Of all the packages I > > > maintain, only one was affected by this issue. That one was easily > > > solvable by deleting the bundled swig generated code in the sources and > > > have the build regenerate it with a newer swig version that doesn't > > > produce broken code. > > > > Our project isn't bundling any Swig generated code. It's generated as a > > part of the build process. Try not to make assumptions in future. > > Where did I make this assumption? I quoted your assumption: "Don't use swig as an excuse not to fix things." But you deleted that line when replying. > The description of my experience was > supposed to tell something about swig. That older versions had problems > but newer does not. No reflection on your project was intended > whatsoever. Your experience is nothing like mine. We don't bundle any "swig generated code in the sources". As I said, all of the Swig generated code is generated by swig is generated _as part of the build process_. None of it is bundled with our sources. -- Darryl L. Pierce <mcpierce@xxxxxxxxx> http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/ "What do you care what people think, Mr. Feynman?"
Attachment:
pgpEi5D6W4_6C.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
