[flac-dev] Do we need a pre-release?

[Robert Kausch]

Am 08.12.2016 um 20:44 schrieb Brian Willoughby:
> On Dec 8, 2016, at 12:59 AM, Dave Yeo <dave.r.yeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/08/16 12:24 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
>>> On 7 December 2016 at 21:08, Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+la at mega-nerd.com> wrote:
>>>> lvqcl.mail wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "make -f Makefile.lite" also doesn't work out of box.
>>>> Didn't work for the 1.3.1 release either. Makes me wonder why we even
>>>> keep it around.
>>> Because it works on many systems with only tiny tweaks (e.g. passing
>>> an env var) without the mess that is GNU autotools.
>>> I use it frequently and always thought of it of an fine asset to have
>>> (which other projects lack).
>>> Would be nice to keep it IMHO.
>> I agree. Here it would require a lot of tweaking but it is still a good beginning point for someone who needs a plain makefile.
>> Even if slightly broken, it should be kept as a template.
>> Dave
> Maybe add a README.lite in that directory, or a section in an existing README, to explain the purpose of Makefile.lite and the fact that it may not work exactly as provided? I'm not building for any of the systems that would use it, so this is just my comment from the peanut gallery.
>
> Brian Willoughby
Here is a patch for the Makefile.lite build system that should make it 
work again on most systems. Tested on Windows (MSYS) and Ubuntu 12.10. 
The main issues were inclusion of non-existing Makefile.deps, missing 
PACKAGE_VERSION define and wrong build order (i.e. trying to build flac 
before libFLAC and other dependencies).

----
Robert Kausch
robert.kausch at freac.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: flac-1.3.2pre1-litefix.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3204 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/attachments/20161210/a72de964/attachment.bin>