Re: Is the autogen directory still needed?

[Bruce Korb <bruce.korb@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]

As far as I know, you are not using autogen at all in any way.  So having
an autogen directory makes no sense whatever.

On Saturday, October 26, 2013, Glenn Morris wrote:

>
> We added the autogen/ directory ~ 2.5 years ago, when we stopped keeping
> configure (at top-level) in the repository. I run a daily cron job that
> keeps autogen/configure etc updated.
>
> This requires no effort, but I think it has become pointless, basically
> just making noise commits.
>
> The main motivations for adding it, as I see it, were:
>
> 1) The developers on MS Windows needed to see any updates for
> src/config.h (new defines etc) that might need to be copied to
> nt/config.nt, and did not want to want have to run autoconf themselves.
>
> 2) People who wanted to build Emacs from bzr on POSIX platforms but were
> for some reason unable to install (sufficiently recent) autoconf/automake.
>
>
> Point 1) no longer applies. Bzr Emacs on MS Windows now requires
> autotools, and nt/config.nt is no longer being updated.
>
> Point 2) has never been very convincing IMO. It is very easy to install
> autotools. The autogen/copy_autogen alternative is not 100% reliable.
>
> The MS-DOS port is not a relevant factor AFAICS, because no-one builds
> it from bzr, and when building from release tarfiles there's no need to
> run autotools. If necessary, I could keep just autogen/config.in and
> whatever MS-DOS needs (not configure).
>
>
> I'd keep the part of the cron job that updates loaddefs files (which
> does not happen nearly so often), and stop doing the autotools part.
>
> Any opinions?
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1891 bytes --]