[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#40322] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add Xplanet.
From: |
Eric Bavier |
Subject: |
[bug#40322] [PATCH v3] gnu: Add Xplanet. |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:50:27 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Posteo Webmail |
On 31.03.2020 02:57, R Veera Kumar wrote:
+ (patches
+ (search-patches
+ "xplanet-1.3.1-remove-null-comparison.patch"
+ "xplanet-1.3.1-libdisplay_DisplayOutput.cpp.patch"
+ "xplanet-1.3.1-libimage_gif.c.patch"
+ "xplanet-1.3.1-readConfig-fixclang.cpp.patch"
Is this patch necessary if we're building with gcc?
+ "xplanet-1.3.1-xpUtil-Add2017LeapSecond.cpp.patch"))))
+ (build-system gnu-build-system)
+ (native-inputs
+ `(("pkg-config" ,pkg-config)))
+ (inputs
+ `(("libx11" ,libx11)
+ ("libxscrnsaver" ,libxscrnsaver)
+ ("libxext" ,libxext)
+ ("libice" ,libice)
+ ("freetype" ,freetype)
+ ("pango" ,pango)
+ ("giflib" ,giflib)
+ ("libjpeg", libjpeg)
+ ("libpng" ,libpng)
+ ("libtiff" ,libtiff)
+ ("zlib" ,zlib)))
+ (arguments
+ `(#:configure-flags
+ (list
+ "--without-pnm" ;; no proper pnm library in guix
The "netpbm" package provides a pnm library.
diff --git
a/gnu/packages/patches/xplanet-1.3.1-remove-null-comparison.patch
b/gnu/packages/patches/xplanet-1.3.1-remove-null-comparison.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..002701ed0c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gnu/packages/patches/xplanet-1.3.1-remove-null-comparison.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
+Origin: Gentoo Harri Nieminen 2017-02-28
+Url:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/log/x11-misc/xplanet/files/
++xplanet-1.3.1-remove-null-comparison.patch
+
+Index: src/libannotate/addArcs.cpp
+===================================================================
+diff --git a/src/libannotate/addArcs.cpp b/src/libannotate/addArcs.cpp
+--- a/src/libannotate/addArcs.cpp (revision 206)
++++ b/src/libannotate/addArcs.cpp (revision 207)
+@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@
+ {
+ ifstream inFile(arcFile.c_str());
+ char *line = new char[MAX_LINE_LENGTH];
+- while (inFile.getline (line, MAX_LINE_LENGTH, '\n') !=
NULL)
++ while (inFile.getline (line, MAX_LINE_LENGTH, '\n'))
I'm worried this might not be correct. The "getline" function always
returns it's first parameter, which, I think, can never evaluate to a
falsy value. The safer option would be to call ".eof()" on the result,
and would match the intentions. See e.g.
https://notabug.org/bavier/guix-bavier/src/master/bavier/patches/xplanet-cxx11-eof.patch
--
`~Eric