From: Godmar Back (gback@cs.utah.edu)
Date: Sat Jan 09 1999 - 17:21:22 EST
Forwarded message:
> From oliva@dcc.unicamp.br Sat Jan 9 14:55:13 1999
> Sender: oliva@araguaia.dcc.unicamp.br
> To: Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu>
> Cc: kaffe-core@rufus.w3.org
> Subject: Re: changed files?
> References: <199901092126.OAA09274@sal.cs.utah.edu>
> From: Alexandre Oliva <oliva@dcc.unicamp.br>
> Date: 09 Jan 1999 19:52:25 -0200
> In-Reply-To: Godmar Back's message of "Sat, 9 Jan 1999 14:26:34 -0700 (MST)"
> Message-ID: <orpv8o867a.fsf@araguaia.dcc.unicamp.br>
> Lines: 19
> User-Agent: Gnus/5.070068 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.68) XEmacs/20.4 (Emerald)
> Mime-Version: 1.0
>
> On Jan 9, 1999, Godmar Back <gback@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
>
> > I strongly prefer that the sequence "cvs update -d; ./configure; make"
> > does *NOT* depend in *ANY* way on having automake or even gmake
> > even installed, let alone the right or future versions (cvs) of that
> > software.
>
> If you didn't have automake installed, it would have worked exactly as
> you describe. The problem is that the script that detects whether
> automake is installed and uses the `missing' script as a work-around
> does not check which version of automake is needed for the current
> makefiles. I agree this is a bug, and I'll send a suggestion for
> automake's auto-detection to test the versions of the needed tools,
> not only for their existences.
>
... and until that happens, I would like you to repair
"cvs update -d; ./configure; make" --- somehow.
We can't say that people need to use gmake, set four env variables or
depend on an unreleased version of automake simply to configure their
tree after they've updated.
I know you think that's "only a small group" of people, but I think that
for one we need all the help we can get and secondly, look at how many
questions about required software packages we're already getting (libz,
png, gif, you name it) --- I do not want to see messages like "all I did
you to cvs update my tree, and now where do I get automake 1.4 from
so that I can test my silly fix that makes Double.value0 throw a
NullPointerException like it should and not a WhateverException like
it shouldn't."
- Godmar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:34 EDT