GNU bug report logs - #24026
librecad and dealii depend on relocated muparser source code repo

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#24026: closed (librecad and dealii depend on relocated
 muparser source code repo)
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:27:01 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Thu, 21 Jul 2016 18:26:16 -0400
with message-id <20160721222616.GA9741 <at> jasmine>
and subject line Re: bug#24026: librecad and dealii depend on relocated muparser source code repo
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #24026,
regarding librecad and dealii depend on relocated muparser source code repo
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
24026: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=24026
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: librecad and dealii depend on relocated muparser source code repo
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 12:42:57 -0400

The dealii, dealii-openmpi, and librecad packages are now failing
due to a missing dependency:

  svn: E160013: Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'http://muparser.googlecode.com/svn/trunk'
  svn: E160013: '/svn/trunk' path not found

It seems that the muparser developers have switched to github.

      Mark

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Eric Bavier <ericbavier <at> openmailbox.org>
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>, 24026-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#24026: librecad and dealii depend on relocated muparser
 source code repo
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 18:26:16 -0400

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:52:00PM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:39:45 -0400
> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 07:07:25AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> > > Hmm.  It would be good to see the diff between the two "versions" of
> > > 2.2.5.  If there's anything substantive in there, then we might want to
> > > bump the version on our behalf.  Otherwise it probably doesn't matter.  
> > 
> > The difference seem trivial to me. There are fixed typos in comments,
> > and code changes in 'example1.cpp'. I assume that 'example1.cpp' is
> > unimportant, but I don't know.
> > 
> > What do you think about the attached patch?
> 
> LGTM.

Thanks for the review!

Pushed as d7cff656d.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.