On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:29:18PM +0100, Biot Olivier wrote:
> 1. You need to run the perl script with "$PERL filename.pl"
> This also requires that the check for perl must happen
> prior to running "$PERL filename.pl".
Hmm, this is interesting, as the INIT statement should be rather
early in configure.in - I'll need to check this.
> 2. I like to know which was the last released version from
> which the cvs version is derived.
I didn't want to create such a long version string, but I don't
feel strong about this. The change is trivial. If nobody objects
I'll make it later today.
> 3. Most of the time I do a "cvs -z 3 update -P -d" followed
> with a mere "make". The version as computed by ./configure
> and stored in config.h will be stale.
Yes, I mentioned that as a drawback. Unfortunately, I don't have
a good idea how to fix this, but I'll give it some more thought.
> 4. You cannot build an official release from CVS as there will
> always be a CVS directory.
Actually you should: make dist should use the PACKAGE_VERSION,
not VERSION - I explicitely changed it and I'm quite sure I tested
it too. If not, please let me know.
> If we assume that whenever a new version is released, the
> configure script is updated, then we can keep the base version
> in the configure script as is.
I noted that in my original mail as a drawback.
> In order to compute a valid "CVS version" identifier, we need
> to define it in the Makefiles so every run of make computes an
> up-to-date version identifier. So that would be the place to
> run the cvsdate.pl script. As a result, $PERL is already
> defined for us by ./configure, so the order of the autoconf
> macros is no longer an issue :)
ahh
> Maybe we can use a "-DCVS_VERSION=xxxxxx" compiler flag in
> the Makefiles for the CVS version as it is conditionally
> defined (only if using CVS)?
Hmm, that sounds better than what I'm doing now. Let me
think some more about it, but right now I like it and think
it is doable.
> This still leaves issue 4 open.
>
> Anyway, I'd like to have some comments on this from the other
> people on the list :)
Thanks for the feedback!
Ciao
Jörg
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
