Re: GOB

[Bruno Pires Marinho <bapm camoes rnl ist utl pt>]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Peter Williams wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 13:40:22 Jules Bean wrote:
> > I'm feeling very stupid right now, but I though gob was optional to build
> > balsa?
> > 
> > Or is it necessary, to build the CVS version?
> > 
> 
> As a followup, it seems there was some wacky stuff going on with these
> files in CVS... Bonsai reveals that the recorded revision is 1.6, although
> when I added the files they were bumped from 1.3 to 1.4. In addition, when
> I 'cvs add'ed the files, they we're 're-adding file[s] (in place of dead
> revision 1.3)'. All this stuff is somewhat worrisome, but I rechecked-out
> the directory and it built fine, without needing GOB, so I guess we're cool.
> (In addition, the versions of the newly-checked-out files were all over
> the place, so maybe I wasn't reading carefully the versions before.)

You where reading carefully the versions before. The generated files where
totally removed by me... other packages don't keep the generated files. At
least for docbook files so I assumed it was the correct way to do it.

When a distribution tar is built using "make dist" the generated files
from gob and docbook are added to the tar file and the user doesn't need
gob or docbook but the CVS user needs gob and docbook to build the
package.

If this not the correct way to do it please forgive me for removing the
generated files starting from docbook and ending on gob.

Bye.

                                               Bruno Pires Marinho
                                      http://camoes.rnl.ist.utl.pt/~bapm/