Re: [Gimp-print-devel] [External] Re: PKG_LIB_DIR/PKGMODULEDIR expansion issues

[Matsumura, G. <gm9...@oh...>]

On 7/16/22 17:01, Robert Krawitz wrote:
> The model count == 0 patch looks unproblematic, although you removed a blank line unnecessarily.
> Could you regenerate it without that inadvertent change?

Unless I am mistaken, it seems that a blank line was added rather than
removed. I added this line in order to provide visual clarity,
especially with the if statement right above it, but it can be removed
if that would be desirable.

> The prefix defined patch is a bit more complex; in particular, you've removed a number of cases.
> Those changes don't look a priori wrong, but I'd like to make sure this gets well tested.  What
> testing have you done on it?

Thank you very much for asking. I apologize in that in the process of
testing, I found that the quoting on one of the lines for the first
patch was slightly off, as well as the AC_SUBST statements. I have
attached an updated patch.

So far, I have tested on Void Linux and NetBSD with various combinations
of configure flags I could think of, especially for the cases dealt with
by the specific code that was removed, although I doubtless have given
insufficient attention to some cases. If you have any ideas on how I
could make these tests more comprehensive, I would be glad to know.

Thank you for your patience.

Regards,
    George