On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 07:13:30PM -0700, Eric Gillespie wrote:
> Jens Seidel <jensseidel_at_users.sf.net> writes:
>
> > If you don't like it, please, please don't bother me and either improve
> > it later yourself or provide a proper text.
>
> Uh, wow.
Remember that this was related to log entry discussions not to the
patch.
> > PS: Don't forget to call ./autogen.sh again. Don't know why autotools
> > are not started by default after touching configure.ac. Argh, now I see,
> > it's a autoconf project but not a automake one ... OK, this explains it.
>
> Few things in software development are as obnnoxious as 'make
> distclean' running configure.
Can this happen in a automake based project? I thought it just called
clean and removes also config.h, config.log, ... but as long as
configure.ac or a dependent M4 file isn't touched configure shouldn't be
called!??
Based on my own experience I find autoconf (generates configure) much
more difficult (at least the configuration: configure.ac, M4 handling)
than automake (generated Makefile templates) with it's tiny
Makefile.am's.
But the current build solution is OK until nobody objects (no, I'm mean,
if everyone agrees ("+1") to patches) if one tries to fix remaining errors
(such as no parallel make support during install, or depending on an
properly installed Subversion during "make install" (see e.g.
http://www.nabble.com/make-install-doesn't-install-td19177330.html which
contains even a minor patch which can be applied if
include/subversion-1/svn-revision.txt isn't used (which I think is
true))). And there is of course also the problem that installation isn't
just a simple
./configure
make
make install
but has to deal with subcomponents (such as javahl) differently and in a
fixed order.
Jens
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-10-22 09:50:28 CEST