Re: Migration to Git?
On 9/30/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > several GNU projects (including autoconf) have moved to Git, is there Just curious... why git over svn? ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Migration to Git?
On Oct 1, 2007, at 8:59 AM, NightStrike wrote: On 9/30/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, several GNU projects (including autoconf) have moved to Git, is there Just curious... why git over svn? Instead of going in lengthy threads, I think you should simply read these threads: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2006-12/msg00018.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2007-09/msg00116.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2007-09/msg00053.html AFAIK, one of the main reasons is that Git has a git-cvsserver (IOW, you can access the Git repository through a CVS server) which is useful to provide (mostly read-only) access to the repositories to legacy platforms where neither Git nor SVN is available. Another major reason is that Savannah added support for Git and not for SVN. And, honestly, (my opinion here) Git fits better the needs of projects such as that of the FSF because everyone can very easily clone the entire history of a project and maintain their own patches (many people do that, at least during the time they're developing some features) and then submit them to the mailing lists for review by the (few) maintainers out there. SVN just doesn't fit with this model. And it has uberbroken branching/merging/tagging implementations. Cheers, -- Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna EPITA Research and Development Laboratory PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Migration to Git?
On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Benoit SIGOURE wrote: Hello, several GNU projects (including autoconf) have moved to Git, is there any similar plan for automake and libtool? Is anyone in charge of this? Help needed? I think that the current priority for libtool *must* be to finish the first 2.X release. Any distraction (regardless of apparent merit) will simply postpone that release even further. Yes, that's right. When will this happen? Is there a TODO list of things that are still to be done before we can release 2.X? I'd be glad to help if I can. Cheers, -- Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna EPITA Research and Development Laboratory PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Question about shlibpath_overrides_runpath / relinking
Hi together! I have a question about relinking. I'm porting libtool 1.5.24 to a compiler which uses microsoft's cl.exe in the background. I have all libtool tests passing right now. Still i feel, that relinking should not be neccessary with my compiler (it supports hardcoding correctly, LD_LIBRARY_PATH is my shlibpath_var, and it is looked at after the hardcoded runpath to find libraries), it just eats up a lot of time. Now, Settings shlibpath_overrides_runpath to yes results in everything working fine, except the build-relink[2].test(s), which now both fail, since libtool is able to detect the false setting for shlibpath_overrides_runpath. Is there any other way to tell libtool, that it should not relink, which does not break anything else. Thanks in advance, Cheers, Markus -- Salomon Automation GmbH - Friesachstrasse 15 - A-8114 Friesach bei Graz Sitz der Gesellschaft: Friesach bei Graz UID-NR:ATU28654300 - Firmenbuchnummer: 49324 K Firmenbuchgericht: Landesgericht fur Zivilrechtssachen Graz ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Migration to Git?
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Benoit SIGOURE wrote: I think that the current priority for libtool *must* be to finish the first 2.X release. Any distraction (regardless of apparent merit) will simply postpone that release even further. Yes, that's right. When will this happen? Is there a TODO list of things that are still to be done before we can release 2.X? I'd be glad to help if I can. Yes, there is a TODO list. Gary is working on the remaining big task (deciding how to build/use libltdl in a project). Since he is likely to strongly prefer git, then this could serve as extra incentive to get the task completed. :-) Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
Re: Question about shlibpath_overrides_runpath / relinking
Hello Markus, * Duft Markus wrote on Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 01:55:55PM CEST: > > Still i feel, that relinking should not be neccessary with my compiler [...] > Is there any other way to tell libtool, that it should not relink, which > does not break anything else. AFAIR we fixed that in CVS HEAD, for MinGW/MSYS. No, I'm sorry I don't remember exactly, but grepping ChangeLog entries, the change on 2004-10-12 sounds like it could do the trick. Hope that helps. Cheers, Ralf ___ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
