Re: [rfc] Move Makefile.in:VERSION to VERSION file

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> > Per discussion on the gdb@ list, this patch moves GDB's version number
> > out of Makefile.in and into a separate file called (of all things :-)
> > VERSION.
> 
> This will get us back into the nuisance we had with COPYING and
> copying.c, due to the file-name letter-case nuisance on DOS/Windows
> file systems.  See this ChangeLog entry:

I was wondering about that - I had this vague memory.

>   2000-04-03  Eli Zaretskii  <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
> 
>           * Makefile.in (copying.c): Depend on copying.txt, not COPYING.
>           (copying.txt): New target, a link to COPYING.
> 
> Can we have a different name, please?  Why can't we have version.c in
> the first place, without any intermediaries?  COPYING was an external
> file, but VERSION is not, I believe.

I thought about that.  The reasons I created a separate file containing
just the version, rather than putting it in version.c, were two fold:

	o	keep it completly separate
		from the source

	o	make the update process as
		robust (mindless) as possible.

What exactly is the restriction on the filenames?  ``VERSION'' is a
fairly natural place to put a version number.

	Andrew