-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Eric Blake wrote: > I'm not sure how that works. Yes, my understanding is that libssl is a > gnulib client, but then it seems like you should have been asking on the > libssl list. I don't see wget listed in gnulib/users.txt; do we need to > add an entry?
I doubt that libssl would have been appropriate: the m4 code wasn't specific to libssl; it could have been any library. > However, I am positive that gnulib-tool won't work without > automake's Makefile.am, and very few packages are able to use gnulib > without gnulib-tool in the current scheme of things. Well, except that it's my impression that a lot of projects use just pieces of gnulib: and in particular, the havelib stuff. I suspect that wget's use of havelib probably predates the existence of gnulib-tool, but I could be wrong about that. I honestly don't know when or how they slurped that code in, but they're using it at any rate, and since the code came from gnulib... :) > Apologies if my first email sounded harsh. On re-reading what I wrote, I > think my tone came across more negatively than I intended. It was not so > much a chide of your decision to post here (after all, many of us on this > list subscribe to multiple lists, and happily do our best to answer a > question regardless of where it is posted, under the philosophy that open > source replies open answers); as it was a note that for archival purposes, > someone else having a similar autoconf problem will not think to search > this list. I didn't think it was harsh; but I did disagree that autoconf would be more appropriate. I hope my response didn't seem too snippy or anything, either (God, how it sucks not being able to include tone-of-voice in an email). However, I'm new to the list, whereas you are certainly not, so I'm prepared to be wrong. :) ...but if I'm wrong, I'd like to understand why it's a better forum, so I know how to make better choices the next time around. > But to bring things back to gnulib, let us know if you are interested in > moving wget over to automake and gnulib, and if you need any help in that > regards. Wget will almost certainly be moving to automake. Automake isn't perfect, and I sympathize with its original author's decision not to move to automake; but to my mind, the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages. As to gnulib, I haven't looked closely enough at it to see what aspects would be especially useful. We're probably already using a fair amount of "protocode" that was common to GNU projects and eventually became a part of gnulib. Obviously, portablity is important, so it mainly depends what we run up against. :) - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGuVNO7M8hyUobTrERCBLAAJ9VUKGtUdCWP44onzd4KWrh0xTQIQCeM9ja BxdPLeqK2CYbjW66ZM0yBI8= =rcn3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
