Guy Harris <g...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> This is definitely an argument in favor of distributing the configure
> script - not just the source files that generate the configure script -
> as part of the release tarball.
> It also might be considered an argument in favor of not having the
> generated configure script checked into the SCM system:
> if it's checked into SCM, it means that whoever updates configure.in or
> aclocal.m4 needs to regenerate the configure script on their machine and
> check the result in, meaning that there might be several different
> versions of autoconf used to generate the configure script that ends up
> in a release tarball;
> if it's *not* checked into SCM, but generated by "make releasetar", it
True.
But it means that anyone who checks out code from git is foobar if they can
not get the *correct* version of autoconf installed to generate the files.
I've been in this position *REPEATEDLY* and it turns a 20 minute
patch-test-send effort into a half-day effort, which means it doesn't happen.
That means we will get untested code diffs, via email rather than git, and
they will be based upon the last released version rather than git...
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
_______________________________________________
tcpdump-workers mailing list
tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org
https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
