[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New build process?
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: New build process? |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Jul 2011 22:58:01 -0400 |
Sure, but having to run autogen.sh on a project that's just been checked
out of
version control is also very common in the free software world, and our
actual
source tarballs do contain pre-built autoconf scripts. The problem with a
self-replacing configure script is that, as you mentioned, it'd be hard to
tell
bzr to version the placeholder script, but ignore the generated one; solving
this problem by using a nonstandard name for the generated `configure'
script
would be surprising. I think our current approach is fine.
We could call the current configuration script `configure-internal'.
Then have a small `configure' script that checks whether the
`configure-internal' file exists and is up to date, and if not,
generates it. Then it would run `configure-internal'.
This would DTRT in all cases, wouldn't it?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
Use free telephony http://directory.fsf.org/category/tel/
- New build process?, Alan Mackenzie, 2011/07/26
- Re: New build process?, David Kastrup, 2011/07/26
- Re: New build process?, David Reitter, 2011/07/26
- Re: New build process?, Daniel Colascione, 2011/07/26
- Re: New build process?,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: New build process?, Tim Cross, 2011/07/26
- Re: New build process?, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Tim Cross, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Peter Münster, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Tim Cross, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Peter Münster, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, David Kastrup, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/07/27
- Re: New build process?, Tim Cross, 2011/07/27