This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] update automake version to 1.11.6

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Joel Brobecker <> wrote:
>> > i don't have a problem with requiring people to use the same exact
>> version.
>> > i do think that requiring them to build/install by hand is
>> > unreasonable.  it's pretty rare (by design) for projects to do this
>> > sort of thing (commit the generated autotools), so it's pretty rare
>> > for this to be an issue, so it's pretty rare for people to be
>> > required to manage this.  it's a throw back to pre-distro days when
>> > people were used to building/install software themselves, and it's
>> > unnecessary friction for new people to get into the development
>> > process today.  death by a thousand cuts and all that.
>> It's only a barrier for people who need to change the or
>> files, which is not most developers.
> Agreed.
> Also, I don't think that building autoconf and automake once every
> few years, and then using that to generate the files is really that
> much of a barrier. In the meantime, it allows us to avoid the noise
> you get when slightly different versions generate slightly different
> code. I personally do verify the changes in the configure files,
> for instance, and ask myself whether each hunk I see makes sense
> to me or not. Seeing unrelated changes because others used a different
> version makes that process a little harder (and, most of the time,
> I'll just start over, and push a patch that first regenerates the
> file).

We should coordinate this with GCC.   I have been using autoconf
and automake specified in


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]