[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Patchy email
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Patchy email |
Date: |
Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:58:01 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) |
David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> *** FAILED BUILD ***
>>>
>>> nice make doc -j3 CPU_COUNT=3
>>>
>>> Previous good commit: 8019ff784cd3aa6cc43b8eb8f29a621bc5800f5c
>>>
>>> Current broken commit: f1b7a60cdb4c2f1d41329a1b3a6a01f4306f6467
>>
>> That would be the 2240 work. I did a full make check and a build of the
>> info documentation which in my experience is pretty much the same as a
>> make doc but somewhat faster. Seems that the similarity does not go
>> deep enough. My guess is that translations may not be covered.
>>
>> Apologies.
>>
>> I'll be fixing this, but it will take several hours to make a doc build
>> on my current setup. Do you have the log files for the failed runs,
>> perchance?
>
> Sorry again for the problem, but I am actually at a loss what to do if
> my guess about the translations is correct: do I copy over the relevant
> @lilypond passages and keep everything else the same (namely unupdated,
> and do I leave the @example code passages unchanged or do I copy them
> over as well?) including "this is a translation of committish ...", but
> change the \version string?
>
> Basically, do I simulate having applied a remarkably clever convert-ly
> rule?
I decided that this probably makes the most sense. I apologize for the
stupidity of totally overlooking that without covering the translations
this can't possibly work.
I will be committing translations with fixed code in the next hour or so
to staging. My testing setup is not capable of providing feedback for
them in a timely manner; James has offered to do that for me. I hope to
rectify this ASAP and get staging back into orderly state.
Sorry again.
--
David Kastrup
Patchy email, lilypond . patchy . graham, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, Graham Percival, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, David Kastrup, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, Graham Percival, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, David Kastrup, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, David Kastrup, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, David Kastrup, 2012/01/25
Re: Patchy email, David Kastrup, 2012/01/25
Patchy email, lilypond . patchy . graham, 2012/01/28