[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [Conclusion] Subversion 1.3 distribution tar slimmer?

From: Michael Sweet <mike_at_easysw.com>
Date: 2005-09-01 20:09:17 CEST

David James wrote:
> ...
>>Again, the compromise I support is having a version of the source tarballs
>>that includes all of the dependencies. -- justin
> +1. Should we also favour system libraries over build-directory
> libraries, if the system libraries are recent? This would vastly
> speed up configure and build times for users who already have some
> combination of apr/apr-util/neon installed.

I use a dual-approach with HTMLDOC and FLTK:

     1. Provide --enable-localfoo configure options to use the local
        versions instead of the installed ones.

     2. If --enable-localfoo is not specified, check for a recent-
        enough version of foo and use it if available. Otherwise,
        use the local version of foo.

That said, I'm OK with the Ghostscript/Subversion way as well: if
we have a foo subdirectory, use the local foo unless otherwise
requested via configure option.

The key is to retain support for building the required libraries
within the Subversion tarball. Whether you (Subversion) guys ship it
that way or not, I want to be able to put everything together and
bootstrap the development/build system as quickly as possible.

Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products           mike at easysw dot com
Internet Printing and Document Software          http://www.easysw.com
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 1 20:10:20 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.