hi
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote: > Hello! > > > On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > > In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic > > links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is: > > replace them by the file to which they are linked. > > Yes, thanks. I do understand another part of this autoconf > mess now. > I thought the autotools might be able to copy files instead of > making symlinks. But it looks like I have to replace the symlinks > with files by myself. or otherwise add --copy to libtoolize but as I said in the other e-mail, I do not agree with this solution > Do you or does anyone here have a Makefile/sh > snippet which I might use for this task? > > > > the old version is "nonexistent". Normally one would expect the > > source distribution to include these files (INSTALL, install-sh, etc). > > No, I am packaging from the official release tar file. These needed > files are not included in upstream source. > Upstream provides an autogen.sh script. The user is supposed > to run that script and a normal "make;make install" works > after that. this happens but is not very nice: it forces people to have auto* installed the whole idea of auto* is that the -) the developer prepares the program using auto* -) the user who wants to compile does not need auto* > > However, after a number of bug reports, I have changed my mind. It > > doesn't pay to mess around with automake/autoconf/libtool and stuff > > inside debian/rules. All I do now is: make any tweaks to Makefile.am > > or configure.in, re-run the auto-stuff on my local copy, and live with > > the enlarged diff that results. well this is a possible solution, (but as you have seen, the diff is as big as the tar.gz) a. -- A Mennucc "È un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa!" (Renato Carotone) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
