>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom> But I'm not as sure about renaming the executables by default. I Tom> think I'd prefer to simply install as `automake', and let package Tom> maintainers use `--program-suffix=-1.5' (or equivalent) in their Tom> spec files. What do you think of that? Ok, now I'm convinced that we need to install the versioned executables. It is the only way to get consistent results across all platforms using the default install behavior. Tom> One issue is what we put in the rebuild rules in the Makefile. My current thinking is that we would name the installed version and the install directories after the "install version". For anything in the 1.5 series (1.5.1, 1.5-p1, 1.5c, whatever), this would be "1.5". Then we would guarantee that for a given "install version" we would only do bug fixes. So for instance you couldn't install 1.5 and 1.5.1 at the same time. You'd simply have to upgrade in this situation. My rationale for this is that often you can use a slightly older version. So forcing everybody to upgrade to 1.5.2 or whatever, unless it is really required (something that can be specified in AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS), is a bit unfriendly. Any comments on this? Tom> I think the rebuild rule problem is even worse if autoconf is Tom> versioned. Where will the version info come from? Still no solution here :-( Tom
