"Jeremy White" jwhite@codeweavers.com wrote in message news:482CF239.7000207@codeweavers.com...
So...turns out that in this flood of new reporting, that one of the errors only happened to me, and it further turns out to be entirely user error; I didn't have libxslt.
So, the obvious first solution is for me to actually read my configure results and deal with it.
But I think I serve nicely as an example of the sort of incompetent user for whom it would still be nice to have make test work cleanly.
I didn't see any obvious standard way of coping with this situation. Did I miss it? I imagined that maybe we'd skip these cases, but I didn't see evidence of that. I could also imagine a facility whereby we note that the configure was not clean, and then refuse to run make test (or at least refuse to run the full winetest battery). Should we make libxslt non optional (or at least require an explicit --without-libxslt in order to build without it)?
Hi Jeremy,
This could be a good option. libxslt should properly be non-optional since msxml3 relys on it.
From the Makefile.in, its appears to have linked to libxslt for quite some
time, but was never an issue since it was never used.
Francois Gouget raised this bug, http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13035 that libslt should be dynamic, which could be another option.
Best Regards Alistair Leslie-Hughes