John Ralls jralls at ceridwen.us
Sat Dec 14 12:39:27 EST 2013

On Dec 14, 2013, at 8:44 AM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:

> On Saturday 14 December 2013 12:08:17 Geert Janssens wrote:
>> On Saturday 14 December 2013 10:30:14 Cristian Marchi wrote:
>>> Ubuntu 13.04
>>> SWIG Version 2.0.7
>>> Compiled with g++ [x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu]
>>> Configured options: +pcre
>>> I think I need 2.0.10 right?
>> That is: my patch applies only to code generated by 2.0.10 or more
>> recent. Until now GnuCash only required swig 2.0.10 if compiled with
>> guile 2.
>> I didn't consider the option of building gnucash with guile 1.8 and an
>> older version of swig. There is a tiny chance that this patch is not
>> needed either for guile 1.8. So in that case I can simply skip the
>> patch application when building with guile 1.8. If it is mandatory in
>> both cases, I may have to create two patches, one that applies to old
>> swig generated code and one that applies to new swig generated code.
>> I'll check and report back.
> It turns out the patch is only necessary for guile 2. I had already learned from the guile 
> developers that the string handling changed radically between guile 1.8 and 2.0. This was one 
> of the side effects.
> I have committed r23559 to make sure the swig patch is only applied when building with guile 
> 2. In that situation we require swig 2.0.10 anyway.
> Or more precisely we should require it. I have also committed r23560 to improve the swig 
> check to test for 2.0.10 when configure detects guile 2. So that should now be covered as well.

Good, and just in time!

Anyone else have any changes before I make the 2.9.A (think hexadecimally ;-) ) tarballs?

John Ralls

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list