Stefano Lattarini writes:
> On 07/19/2012 08:56 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>> Stefano Lattarini writes:
>>
>>> for example, an autotools old-timer that has run:
>>>
>>> ./configure --prefix /opt/git
>>>
>>> in the past, without running "make distclean" afterwards, would
>>> expect a "make inst
On 07/19/2012 09:43 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
>> Should I add "Acked-by: Matthieu Moy" then? (Sorry if it's a dumb
>> question, but I'm not sure which the preferred policy is around here).
>
> Not necessarily needed if the patch is not otherwise controversial. The
>
Stefano Lattarini writes:
> Should I add "Acked-by: Matthieu Moy" then? (Sorry if it's a dumb
> question, but I'm not sure which the preferred policy is around here).
Not necessarily needed if the patch is not otherwise controversial. The
email discussions are usually sufficient for that. I'd s
On 07/19/2012 08:56 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
>> for example, an autotools old-timer that has run:
>>
>> ./configure --prefix /opt/git
>>
>> in the past, without running "make distclean" afterwards, would
>> expect a "make install" issued after a "make clean" to re
Stefano Lattarini writes:
> for example, an autotools old-timer that has run:
>
> ./configure --prefix /opt/git
>
> in the past, without running "make distclean" afterwards, would
> expect a "make install" issued after a "make clean" to rebuild and
> install git in '/opt/git';
I've been hit
Those filed hold variables, settings and information set by the
configuration process run by './configure'; in Autotools-based
build system that kind of stuff should only be removed by
"make distclean". Having it removed by "make clean" is not only
inconsistent, but causes real confusion for that
6 matches
Mail list logo
