[Cced to bug-hurd, as it's also on-topic there.]
Hello! On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 11:14:25AM +0000, Gustav van der Merwe wrote: > Just glancing over bug-hurd and commit-hurd it seems a lot of time is > spent chasing and updating configure and make files rather than actual > source code Indeed, more work on non-build-system related issues wouldn't be a bad thing to have. Want to contribute to it? > I must admit I am very impressed still by the > maintenance given by the community, special grats to Thomas Schwinge > without whom the traffic on these lists would be significantly lower). Heh, thanks. Nice to read such things from time to time. And yes, especially commit-hurd feels a bit like a one-man show. > Is there perhaps some better infrastructure that could be used to reduce > this overhead? > A different make system, some kind of automation? > Or perhaps I am overreading the traffic, let me know. I think you are indeed overreading it. It was just a ``normal'' maintenance thing, which is (mostly) done now, at least for the GNU Mach package. Of course, we could have sticked with the old (and mostly functional build system) and its deficiencies, but getting used (by applying it to something real) to all the Autoconf and Automake stuff also was a nice and worthwhile experience for me. That's why I did that. Regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
