Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-31 Thread Geert Janssens
On Tuesday 31 March 2015 08:59:03 John Ralls wrote: > > On Mar 31, 2015, at 7:33 AM, Derek Atkins wrote: > > > > John Ralls writes: > >> I also think that it’s good that the build from a tarball based on > >> a > >> random commit fails. Since that tarball doesn’t contain any version > >> informa

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-31 Thread John Ralls
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 7:33 AM, Derek Atkins wrote: > > John Ralls writes: > >> I also think that it’s good that the build from a tarball based on a >> random commit fails. Since that tarball doesn’t contain any version >> information other than what’s in configure.ac, the resulting GnuCash >>

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-31 Thread Derek Atkins
John Ralls writes: [snip] >> I'm not sure my experiment is achievable. But it got me thinking about >> this diverging code path in our source anyway. So to summarize again: >> >> What is the original reason it was implemented this way ? Or put >> differently is there (still) a good reason to a

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-30 Thread Geert Janssens
On Monday 30 March 2015 10:15:10 John Ralls wrote: > > On Mar 30, 2015, at 6:53 AM, Geert Janssens > > wrote:> > > On Saturday 28 March 2015 12:56:10 John Ralls wrote: > >>> On Mar 28, 2015, at 3:16 AM, Geert Janssens > >>> wrote: > >>> What is the original reason it was implemented this way ? O

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-30 Thread John Ralls
> On Mar 30, 2015, at 6:53 AM, Geert Janssens > wrote: > > On Saturday 28 March 2015 12:56:10 John Ralls wrote: >>> On Mar 28, 2015, at 3:16 AM, Geert Janssens >>> wrote: >>> What is the original reason it was implemented this way ? Or put >>> differently is there (still) a good reason to avoi

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-30 Thread Geert Janssens
On Saturday 28 March 2015 12:56:10 John Ralls wrote: > > On Mar 28, 2015, at 3:16 AM, Geert Janssens > > wrote: > > What is the original reason it was implemented this way ? Or put > > differently is there (still) a good reason to avoid on the fly swig > > code generation for a (release) tarball b

Re: Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-28 Thread John Ralls
> On Mar 28, 2015, at 3:16 AM, Geert Janssens > wrote: > > Our build system behaves differently when a build is started from a git > cloned repository or from a release tarball: swig interface files are > only converted into c files when building from git. The tarball assumes > these should

Swig code generation - git src vs tarball src

2015-03-28 Thread Geert Janssens
Our build system behaves differently when a build is started from a git cloned repository or from a release tarball: swig interface files are only converted into c files when building from git. The tarball assumes these should be present. What is the original reason it was implemented this way