Wishes to the new G-Wrap maintainer?

Thomas Viehmann tv at beamnet.de
Wed Jun 30 14:40:48 EDT 2004


Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists wrote:
> Ummwell, maybe. True, hacking gnucash was a breeeze:
> 	# apt-get build-dep gnucash
> 	# apt-get source gnucash
> but I wouldn't be that sure if a similar approach would work if I had to
> work on gnucash CVS, maybe depending on several other libraries fresh from
> CVS. And I'm not sure either if potential developers that are running
> other distros (SuSE, RH) have a similarily lucky as debian, gentoo and
> similar distros -users.
CVS is somewhat more difficult, but the "apt-get build-dep" will give
you a good approximation of a package setup needed to build the CVS
source. (It'll be more difficult if the dependencies change more
dramatically, as probably for the g2 branch.)

But while we're at whishlist:
I'm not 100% certain whether that was g-wrap at fault, but at some point
it struck me as odd that the guile bindings try to load the lib*.so
links instead of the lib*.so.X.


Thomas Viehmann, <http://thomas.viehmann.net/>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 239 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20040630/ee56ece7/attachment.bin

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list