Summary: | sci-libs/netcdf-4.1.1-r3 fails with USE=doc | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Andrey Grozin <grozin> |
Component: | [OLD] Library | Assignee: | Gentoo Science Related Packages <sci> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | Martin.vGagern |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | build log |
Description
Andrey Grozin
2010-12-07 05:31:28 UTC
Created attachment 256572 [details]
build log
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 311885 *** I'd not call this a duplicate of bug #311885. That report is about texi2dvi ever failing, which can only be reasonably fixed by including the upstream fix, as requested there. This one here is about texi2dvi failing in the specific context of the netcdf ebuild, which can be worked around e.g. by passing LC_ALL=C to its invocation, as written in bug #347780 comment #10. So I suggest you, the netcdf maintainer(s), do the following: 1. Either reopen this here, or dup it to bug #347780 and reopen that one. 2. Whichever bug report you choose, make it depend on bug #311885. 3. Modify the netcdf ebuild to use the workaround for the time being. 4. If you feel like it, bug texinfo maintainers to fix bug #311885. (In reply to comment #3) > This one here is about texi2dvi failing in the specific > context of the netcdf ebuild "specific context" is irrelevant. Bug is in texinfo not in netcdf > So I suggest you, the netcdf maintainer(s), do the following: > 1. Either reopen this here, or dup it to bug #347780 and reopen that one. No, that bug was about me not using autotools-utils.eclass properly > 2. Whichever bug report you choose, make it depend on bug #311885. No, because they're reporting the same issue in texinfo, just using "different context", so they're only dupes. > 3. Modify the netcdf ebuild to use the workaround for the time being. That would lead to fixing/working-around all packages in tree that use texinfo, which is insane... > 4. If you feel like it, bug texinfo maintainers to fix bug #311885. Making this bug a dupe of #311885 sends an email to texinfo's maintainer. That's enough. Cheers, Kacper Kowalik |