On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 10:51:37PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:07:22PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > [...] > > > The only problem is with 2.b. In this case, developers should call > > > autopoint before aclocal. Bruno Haible provided autopoint for this > > > exact purpose. It can regenerate m4/gettext.m4 and > > > po/Makefile.in.in for any previous version of gettext, this tool > > > is really great. Since autopoint 0.11.3, one can for instance add > > > AM_GNU_GETTEXT_VERSION([0.12.1]) > > > just after AM_GNU_GETTEXT in configure.ac to request files from > > > gettext 0.12.1. This is useful with packages which depend on > > > automake 1.4, one can use more recent versions; ideally we should > > > try to reproduce the exact same version as upstream to avoid > > > problems.
> > And this fixes the problem that the current version of gettext.m4 depends on > > AM_PROG_MKDIR_P, a macro introduced in automake 1.8? > Yes, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=386072;msg=28 That message says nothing at all about AM_PROG_MKDIR_P, reading it explains nothing to me. Note that the AM_PROG_MKDIR_P bug and the @MKINSTALLDIRS@ bug are separate bugs; the first is caused by gettext.m4 depending on a macro only provided by automake (>= 1.8), the second is caused by a mismatch between the gettext m4 files and the generated Makefile.in.in file. The second is clearly a bug in each package that suffers from the problem. The first, I'm not sure about -- you're saying that autopoint solves the problem, and I don't understand how. > > In any case, I agree that there is no reason for a separate gettext-0.14 > > package, but I don't see how autopoint solves the problem of the undefined > > macro which has to do with compatibility of older versions of *automake*, > > not with older versions of *gettext*; in which case it would still be nice > > to have a solution for making a gettext.m4 available that's compatible with > > the automake-1.4 and automake-1.7 we still ship. (But indeed, no longer RC > > if all the packages build-depending on gettext have been fixed.) > Hmmm, I do not get your point. Which build failure do you have in mind? Well, the gnome-lokkit build failure is one such example. Can you show me a patch for this package that fixes the problem using autopoint, *not* using a dependency on a newer version of automake? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
