From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tim Cross Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New build process? Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:58:39 +1000 Message-ID: References: <20110726184220.GA6390@acm.acm> <87bowg6fre.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <4E2F2084.7070001@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1311753532 9900 80.91.229.12 (27 Jul 2011 07:58:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 07:58:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: david.reitter@gmail.com, dan.colascione@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 27 09:58:48 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qlz0y-0003EB-3l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 09:58:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38396 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qlz0x-00050X-OG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:58:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:54567) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qlz0u-00050G-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:58:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qlz0t-0007IT-J8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:58:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]:49067) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qlz0q-0007HW-BW; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 03:58:40 -0400 Original-Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so1881458iyb.0 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:58:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rXIhQjhCjSEa0W5Mg1kT7NX21zWI3Rq463KYnysm5Yg=; b=V8y7Xgta14TmUI20NMdTL95afNa+JIqy3gSzd3Er3ee4RulfdR1Ggnx5TaIOjRdr/c yJ+5f3LnGANispBCJF524YvdGrUvRgPECcSfUDAHcsSkgd82Eick/a65naYzrLA0Fqff ZoAgxjI6FiExzdKkDm9i0mWo1o0zBTQsN/EkY= Original-Received: by 10.231.197.16 with SMTP id ei16mr3914336ibb.111.1311753519190; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:58:39 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.231.37.76 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:58:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.210.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:142349 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:40:03 +1000 >> From: Tim Cross >> Cc: david.reitter@gmail.com, Daniel Colascione , >> =A0 =A0 =A0 emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> As far back as I can remember, emacs >> sources from the version control repository had an additional step >> that had to be completed ini order to generate the =A0configure script. > > I guess your memory is either faulty or doesn't go back far enough. > Because configure was removed from the Emacs repository only 4 months > ago (on 2011-03-20, see the logs). > OK, sorry, my error - must be confused with other projects. As has been pointed out by others, the need to run autocont or some other command to generate the config file is common when working from sources directly taken from a revision control file. >> The real issue here is whether INSTALL.BZR is an appropriate name for >> the information that alerts people that you need to take extra steps >> when building form sources taken from the version control repository. > > We had INSTALL.CVS when the VC was CVS, and I don't remember any > complaints. > I thought that was what it use to be called. Partly what made me think we had to generate the config script - thinking again, it probably only contained instructions relating to make bootstrap (which I don't *think* you require for tar balls?) and some other platform specific stuff. Still, my main pint is I don't think we should get too carried away trying to automate all of this. It is a common requirement and while some may have been caught out, it is something you should expect when working this close to the development layer. Efforts were made to communicate the changes on this list (by you IIRC Eli) and there is information in the INSTALL.BZR file. My objection with trying to automate or eliminate this simple step is that the solution can often be worse than the problem and adds just another point of potential failure in a step which is already simple and straight-forward (once you know about it!). However, if we can rename the file or make another copy of the instructions under a name which the majority feel is more likely to be noticed, great - all for that. Tim