Hi Eric,
* Eric Blake wrote on Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 01:15:18AM CEST:
> According to Ralf Wildenhues on 4/18/2009 4:27 PM:
> > Tangential to this issue, I think XFile::lock should warn resp. fail
> > also when parallel non-GNU make is used and exposes a locking issue.
>
> I agree; and the patch lo
Ralf Wildenhues gmx.de> writes:
> Hi Eric,
Hi Ralf,
> > touch configure.ac then attempt a parallel make on cygwin:
>
> Do you see these failures with Automake 1.10.2 also?
I'll start checking that, but thought I'd at least give a first round of
replies.
> Which Autoconf versions are you usi
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Tromey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 6:59 AM
> To: Robert Collins
> Cc: Roger Leigh; Alexandre Duret-Lutz; Chadwick A. McHenry;
> GNU Automake List
> Subject: Re: maintainer mode
>
>
>
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russ> [ rebuild rules ]
Russ> It just breaks everything.
That's too extreme.
Russ> I say this largely as a user who compiles hundreds of packages
Russ> that use autoconf and automake. I have *never* been helped by
Russ> these Makefile ru
> "Rob" == Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rob> Ditto for squid. We cannot expect all our users to have automake
Rob> + autoconf on their system. After all, the entire point of
Rob> configure scripts and make dist is that the toolkit doesn't need
Rob> to be present on every system.
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> "Roger" == Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> Roger> In the gimp-print source tree, there are a number of
> Roger> files which we ship in the distributed tarball
> Roger> pre-built. These are PDF and HTML versions of
>>> "Roger" == Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Roger> In the gimp-print source tree, there are a number of
Roger> files which we ship in the distributed tarball
Roger> pre-built. These are PDF and HTML versions of SGML
Roger> manuals and PostScript versions of Texinfo manuals.
>>> "Eric" == Eric Siegerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Eric> 4. The user imported your package into CVS (as I often do).
Eric> Because CVS checkouts are done in alphabetical order, foo.in
Eric> might well have a later timestamp than its corresponding foo,
Eric> without the files' con
> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Leigh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 6:05 AM
Doing this allows us to
> require only developers to have a greater set of tools to be
> installed and configured, without passing on the burden to our users.
Ditto for squid.
Eric Siegerman wrote:
> 4. The user imported your package into CVS (as I often do).
> Because CVS checkouts are done in alphabetical order, foo.in
> might well have a later timestamp than its corresponding foo,
> without the files' content having changed. So the
> maintainer-mod
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Warning: I'm going to give the "AM_MAINTAINER_MODE is pure evil
> on a stick" point of view. I know some people find it useful
> (although I don't know when).
I'm sure the reasons you gave are valid (and I was not aware of some
of the downsides
This is also the situation that occurs when checking out an older
version of my software (using a CVS tag for example) to make a
distribution. If timestamps are not just right automake/autoconf are
required. And in general, the people that receive this software are not
the least bit interest
This is also the situation that occurs when checking out an older version
of my software (using a CVS tag for example) to make a distribution. If
timestamps are not just right automake/autoconf are required. And in general,
the people that receive this software are not the least bit interested
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:17:00PM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> Warning: I'm going to give the "AM_MAINTAINER_MODE is pure evil
> on a stick" point of view.
> Now there are three cases:
> 1. The user unpacked your package, and then run ./configure and make.
> [...]
> 2. The user mod
Warning: I'm going to give the "AM_MAINTAINER_MODE is pure evil
on a stick" point of view. I know some people find it useful
(although I don't know when).
>>> "Chadwick" == Chadwick A McHenry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Chadwick> From the original thread (below) I get the impression
Ch
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "Chadwick" == Chadwick A McHenry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chadwick> Using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE seems to be a Good Thing, in
> Chadwick> light of the potential problems for users, when it is
> Chadwick> absent. Is there any reason I _woul
16 matches
Mail list logo
