[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch] fix parallel build failures in xfsprogs-3.0.0

To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [patch] fix parallel build failures in xfsprogs-3.0.0
From: Greg Banks <gnb@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:22:59 +1100
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <200902261817.02604.agruen@xxxxxxx>
Organization: File Serving Technologies ; Silicon Graphics Inc.
References: <200902240010.25434.vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> <200902261323.09312.agruen@xxxxxxx> <200902261017.30017.vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> <200902261817.02604.agruen@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060911)
Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Thursday, 26 February 2009 16:17:28 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> yes.  i dont know why the xfs progs have been packaging these autogenerated
>> files by themselves.
>> - remove aclocal.m4 from git
>> - run `aclocal -I m4`
>> - run `libtoolize -c -f`
>> - run `autoconf`

Some packages provide a shell script called autogen.sh which automates
all those tedious autotools steps.  The Gnome autogen.sh is fairly
general and does things like check for autotools versions and work out
dynamically which tools to run.


You don't need all that of course, you could get away with a 5-line
shell script.  As long as you call it "autogen.sh" people should know
what to do.

> You mean this should become the normal build process?
> I was actually more thinking along the lines of reducing build dependencies 
> by 
> adding a few more generated files like ./configure ...
Not in a version control system.  Otherwise developers who do run
autoconf, using a different version of autoconf from you, will get an
enormous spurious diff in the configure script which they have to decide
whether to ignore or not.

Greg Banks, P.Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group.
the brightly coloured sporks of revolution.
I don't speak for SGI.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>