Hi,
Tom asked me to repost this to the list. I'm not subscribed, so please
cc if you want to hear from me.
Thanks,
Havoc
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I'm wondering if we could convince you and the autoconf guys to think
about making incompatible autotools releases install in parallel. I
just
Hi,
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What do you mean by "versioned executables"?
>
The bindir/automake-1.4, bindir/automake-1.5 files.
> I think renaming the directories in $(datadir) is fine. But I'm not
> as sure about renaming the executables by default. I think I'd prefer
> to
Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This would require to change all packages providing aclocal/ macros of
> their own, i.e. is not feasible at present time, IMHO.
It can be done slowly if you continue to search datadir/aclocal for
now, and also search the versioned directories. Just de
Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> => IMO, this patch is one alternative towards allowing parallel
> installation of _automake_, but does not help much wrt. the actual
> autotool-issues "Joe Occasional Installer" will meet (eg. when building
> GNOME modules).
>
I agree there are oth
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doesn't `configure --program-suffix=-1.5' work?
It probably would, sure. I just didn't think of it.
> Would it be the job of `make install' to handle this symlink?
> If yes, how should it be updated? Say I install
> Automake-1.5 *after* Aut
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This seems to be the minimum required to allow parallel installs
> of Automake. However doing only this makes unsafe to use
> versions installed that way, due to the rebuild rules issue you
> pointed out: using automake-1.5 is useless if the re
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Tom> My current thinking is that we would name the installed version
> Tom> and the install directories after the "install version". For
> Tom> anything in the 1.5 series (1.5.1, 1.5-p1, 1.5c, wha
Hi,
Look, I think everyone is overcomplicating the problem here. It's
really really really really simple. Anything that is compatible has
the same name; anything that isn't compatible has a different
name. Because from the point of view of an interface user (an app), a
compatible thing implement
Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. I am not sure if recommending share/aclocal- for third party
> macros is a good idea:
> * Currently hardly managable on the user-side => If at all, then some
> auto*tool should installing *.m4's to share/aclocal-
> automatically (data_ACLOCALS = fo
