[Freeciv-Dev] Re: quick and dirty autogen.sh patch

[Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 05:04:16PM +0200, Raimar Falke wrote:

> > > Should we take this opportunity and also remove configure? This would
> > > mean that we add the autoconf and automake as dependencies for CVS
> > > developers.
> > 
> > If you take out configure, there is no reason to stop there. Makefile,
> > Makefile.in and config.h are all generated in the same process.
> > 
> > There is only one problem with that: We add the ancient autoconf2.13 as
> > a dependency, instead of the modern autoconf2.5, so some developers are
> > going to get significant problems.

A more serious problem: if you have the wrong versions, the errors leave
you in the dark on is wrong.  So unless somebody knows which versions
to test for, and how, and adds it, I would prefer not to have these
dependencies.  After all, most developers don't need to run aclocal
&& auto*.  Many people don't even develop, they just want to playtest.

> > So I suggest we don't do that, yet.
> 
> Question to the freeciv-dev readers: what autoconf to you use?

I compile Freeciv on 5 different machines, so that is kind of ambiguous.
However, I'm sure it's safe to assume that whoever can compile Freeciv
from CVS can also get himself the latest autoconf and automake.

> > I'll give porting to 2.5 a shot after the release. That will require a
> > relaxation of the usual quality-of-patch rules, since it will need lots
> > and lots of testing by developers to get it exactly right on all the
> > various platforms.

The more reason for requiring specific auto* versions - even if just
warnings are uissued on different versions, it would give users a hook
on what is wrong in case of errors.

>       Raimar

-- 
Reinier