On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 11:16:25AM -0400, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> > Not right now, as gnome-common 2.4 doesn't have automake1.8 support yet.
> > Malcolm has been working on that though, and said would have a commit
> > ready soonish. I don't know what the status of that is right now.
> Well, let's be clear about what is going on here, since there are really
> two problems at work:
>
> Firstly, there is the issue of making as many GNOME packages as possible
> automake-1.8 "safe". Already (and for many months) gnome-common has
> happily used automake-1.8 if that was all you had available and you
> requested automake-1.5 or later (you can even set
> AUTOMAKE_REQUIRED_VERSION=1.8).
Oh, after closer inspection in CVS, I saw this. Sorry, I have missed
this due to ETOOMANYCHANGELOGFILES ;)
I stand corrected.
> But that is not guarantee that things
> would always work, since there were some assumptions that became invalid
> when automake-1.8 was released. So part of what I am doing at the moment
> is building each module from a completely clean slate and only using
> automake-1.8 then fixing any problems in a way that is compatible with
> earlier automake versions as well. I also do not feel comfortable
> dictating that everybody updates their build tools to the absolute
> latest (putting me at odds with large portions of the Debian project,
> for example), but I am not against asking people to move into the 21st
> century and leave automake-1.4 behind, for example.
No, of course we shouldn't be forcing people to use automake1.8, but
"helping" them to get out of the automake1.4 pit would be quite ok.
("helping" is pronounced "encouraging" by many, and even "forcing" is
acceptable in some counties ;)
Oh, and the Debian project has gnome-common 1.4 in the stable branch, so
we probably can't say much about this :p
> more than just source code files. The patch that intltool applies to
> this file is a bit dependent on both the gettext and automake versions.
> Up until now, only gettext has caused us some late nights fixing
> problems. With automake-1.8, the maintenance pain has expanded. I have
> some intltool fixes that I am testing at the same time as I am testing
> the above changes, but I don't think I have fixed things completely yet.
yeah, this is a big pain in the ass...
> I really need to test build the whole platform before sending the patch
> to CVS. You can all imagine precisely how popular I will (not) be if
> some build patch breaks half the packages for some common setup (again,
> it needs to work for a few recent automake versions, etc). In fact, I am
> seriously considering forging the eventual patch submission email so
> that it looks like it comes from somebody with street-credibility like
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
yeah, right. ask danilo, he knows I suck. :)
> Jordi just so that I don't get blamed. :-)
If you want help to fix random modules' Makfile.am's and build stuff in
general, count on me.
--
Jordi Mallach Pérez -- Debian developer http://www.debian.org/
jordi sindominio net jordi debian org http://www.sindominio.net/
GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/~jordi/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature