Re: Patches to README-release

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hi Jim,

On 28 ม.ค. 2012, at 1:21, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:

Reuben Thomas wrote:

Ping? The patches still apply cleanly to HEAD.

On 22 December 2011 19:54, Reuben Thomas <address@hidden> wrote:

-* Ensure that the desired versions of autoconf, automake, etc.

-  are in your PATH.  See the buildreq list in bootstrap.conf for

-  the complete list.

That paragraph is trying to say that one should be careful not to
prepare a release using anything less than the latest stable releases.
That is *not* checked by running bootstrap, and hence why I mentioned
it here.  For example, if I have a working directory with lib/getdate.c
generated from before the preceding bison release, I should be careful
to remove it (make maintainer-clean) and regenerate it with the newer
version of bison.  In this case, "make distclean" is insufficient.

I.e., you're welcome to reword it, but not to remove it altogether.

How about:

If you have not yet upgraded to saner bootstrap, which check autotools

versions automatically for you, then you'll need to make a painstaking

manual check of the autotools versions in your PATH every time you

want to make a new distribution tarball.

<evil grin>

More succinctly: Does gnulib bootstrap deliberately not consider the

AC_PREREQ and friends versions as full and correct autotool version

bootstrap prerequisites for good reason? Or is that a bug forcing the

addition of this paragraph in README-release, which Reuben has

correctly noted as spurious (when using saner bootstrap)?

P.S. I will repropose saner bootstrap and supporting scripts to gnulib

        when my workload eases off in a few more weeks, as I promised

        last year.

Cheers,

-- 

Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)