Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "litefix".
Did you mean:
itefix
2016 Dec 10
2
Do we need a pre-release?
...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>
2016 Dec 11
1
Do we need a pre-release?
...ed to the attached version.
I'm not sure about the other files you listed. I guess they should
either be added to the tarball or removed from git.
----
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: 1183 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/attachments/20161211/44fdfaf8/attachment.bin>
2016 Dec 11
0
1.3.2pre2
...;$(expr substr $(uname -s) 1
10)"=="MINGW32_NT"];|' and set EXE=.exe in that case instead of
generating the file from common.sh.in.
----
Robert Kausch
robert.kausch at freac.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: flac-1.3.2pre2-litefix.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2153 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/attachments/20161211/fd78b09f/attachment.bin>
2016 Dec 11
2
1.3.2pre2
Hi all,
New pre-release here is at:
http://mega-nerd.com/tmp/flac-1.3.2pre2-win.zip
http://mega-nerd.com/tmp/flac-1.3.2pre2.tar.xz
Changes:
* Fix PACKAGE_VERSION in MSVS project files.
* Fix Makefile.lite in tarball (make test is still failiing).
MD5 and SHA256 sums:
> md5sum flac-1.3.2pre2*
e276e3a9e99ae07f4bd25278f533b9e5 flac-1.3.2pre2.tar.xz
2016 Dec 08
2
Do we need a pre-release?
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