[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120823132851.GA32457@debian>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 17:28:51 +0400
From: Aleksey Cherepanov <aleksey.4erepanov@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: make install
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:52:24AM -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> > For Johnny (as it is), implementing "make install" should be trivial.
>
> Yes, yes it is. I just could not stop my jaw from dropping when it said
> "make install not tested". I kept thinking "then why on earth did you
> bother to write a "make install". Personally I like to test the things
> I write (and release).
I agree that it looks weird from the side.
I did not write Makefile. It is generated by qmake from project file
(that does not contain any specific definitions) and I did not look
into that to check what's going on there (it is postponed till next
release). So I wrote "'make install' was not tested" to not confuse
users with stuff that I did not write and/or test.
It is on my todo list for next release. So I'll test it for Johnny 1.2
(along with things for packaging).
Thanks!
--
Regards,
Aleksey Cherepanov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
