[ITA] doxygen

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ITA] doxygen

Ken Brown-6
There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
current cygport file (also attached).

I've tested that the upstream git repo builds and passes all tests.

Ken

doxygen.cygport (4K) Download Attachment
doxygen.cygport.orig (5K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ITA] doxygen

marco atzeri-4
Am 11.11.2018 um 23:38 schrieb Ken Brown:
> There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
> file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
> current cygport file (also attached).
>
> I've tested that the upstream git repo builds and passes all tests.
>
> Ken
>

updated  cygwin-pkg-maint

Regards
Marco

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ITA] doxygen

Andrew Schulman
> Am 11.11.2018 um 23:38 schrieb Ken Brown:
> > There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
> > file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
> > current cygport file (also attached).
> >
> > I've tested that the upstream git repo builds and passes all tests.
> >
> > Ken
> >
>
> updated  cygwin-pkg-maint

Gold star awarded! https://cygwin.com/goldstars/#KB

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ITA] doxygen

Andrew Schulman
In reply to this post by marco atzeri-4
> Am 11.11.2018 um 23:38 schrieb Ken Brown:
> > There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
> > file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
> > current cygport file (also attached).
> >
> > I've tested that the upstream git repo builds and passes all tests.
> >
> > Ken
> >
>
> updated  cygwin-pkg-maint

Gold star awarded! https://cygwin.com/goldstars/#KB

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ITA] doxygen

Achim Gratz
In reply to this post by Ken Brown-6
Ken Brown writes:
> There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
> file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
> current cygport file (also attached).

For your problem with the debuginfo that we've briefly discussed on IRC:

It turns out I had exactly the same problem before, for exactly the same
reason (Qt moc-generated interface headers) and the same fix works just
as well for doxygen:

CFLAGS+=" -femit-struct-debug-reduced"

That gets you debuginfo packages for both architectures (I didn't have
graphviz installed when building the package locally, but I doubt it
makes a difference for this issue).  I doubt anyone is going to notice
the difference due to the less detailed debugging information… :-)


Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Samples for the Waldorf Blofeld:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#BlofeldSamplesExtra
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ITA] doxygen

cygwin-apps mailing list
On 10/17/2020 9:43 AM, Achim Gratz wrote:

> Ken Brown writes:
>> There's no need for a new release at the moment, but I'm attaching the cygport
>> file I would use if there were.  It differs in only very minor ways from the
>> current cygport file (also attached).
>
> For your problem with the debuginfo that we've briefly discussed on IRC:
>
> It turns out I had exactly the same problem before, for exactly the same
> reason (Qt moc-generated interface headers) and the same fix works just
> as well for doxygen:
>
> CFLAGS+=" -femit-struct-debug-reduced"
>
> That gets you debuginfo packages for both architectures (I didn't have
> graphviz installed when building the package locally, but I doubt it
> makes a difference for this issue).  I doubt anyone is going to notice
> the difference due to the less detailed debugging information… :-)

Thanks!  That's good to know.

Ken