Richard Megginson wrote:
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 18:14 -0700, Pete Rowley wrote:
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Our current policy is to generate these files for release tarballs, and for our 'unpacked' tree on samba.org (current SVN checked out).
OTOH they are required in order to do:
cvs co ./configure make
Yeah, projects typically end up with an ./autogen.sh to make the right innovation of the configure generation tool.
I've found that using autoreconf usually does the right thing. When I change configure.ac/in or Makefile.am or an .m4 file, I always run autoreconf -vfi -v, --verbose verbosely report processing -f, --force consider all files obsolete -i, --install copy missing auxiliary files It takes a little longer, but I almost never have conflict or timestamp problems. Plus, it's part of the standard autotools package, and it is the way the autoconf/automake manuals recommend rebuilding the autotool files. For some projects, this won't work (e.g. for mozldap, you have to just use autoconf-2.13, not autoreconf or autoreconf-2.13).
As I just very recently found out, we also need a very specific version of libtool (1.5.22) to generate ltmain.sh if we want to be able to build a 64-bit Directory Server on Solaris. Running "autoreconf -fvi" will generate a new ltmain.sh that may be a version that we don't want to check in if we expect to be able to immediately run "configure; make install" after checking out the code.
-NGK
Andrew Bartlett
-- Fedora-directory-devel mailing list Fedora-directory-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel
-- Fedora-directory-devel mailing list Fedora-directory-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel