branch_release-1-8 not building

branch_release-1-8 not building

[Neil Jerram]

Fails very quickly in ./autogen.sh (see output below), I think because
of these lines in autogen.sh:

cp -f config.guess config.sub build-aux/
cp -f config.guess config.sub guile-readline/

and because of [0].  Are those lines - which were added by [1] - just wrong now?

[0] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=commit;h=93a48a7130277f49b7b8d441513eae052e72af0d.
[1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=commit;h=31e464f35f4ba964877d8347a7fd6b9efc2e4053

    Neil

./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && make check
autoreconf: Entering directory `.'
autoreconf: configure.in: not using Gettext
autoreconf: running: aclocal --force -I m4
autoreconf: configure.in: tracing
autoreconf: configure.in: adding subdirectory guile-readline to autoreconf
autoreconf: Entering directory `guile-readline'
autoreconf: running: aclocal --force
autoreconf: running: libtoolize --copy --force
autoreconf: running: /usr/bin/autoconf --force
autoreconf: running: /usr/bin/autoheader --force
autoreconf: running: automake --add-missing --copy --force-missing
autoreconf: Leaving directory `guile-readline'
autoreconf: configure.in: AM_GNU_GETTEXT is used, but not AM_GNU_GETTEXT_VERSION
Putting files in AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, `build-aux'.
autoreconf: Leaving directory `.'
guile-readline...
cp: cannot stat `config.guess': No such file or directory
cp: cannot stat `config.sub': No such file or directory

Re: branch_release-1-8 not building

[Ludovic Courtès]

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> Fails very quickly in ./autogen.sh (see output below), I think because
> of these lines in autogen.sh:
>
> cp -f config.guess config.sub build-aux/
> cp -f config.guess config.sub guile-readline/
>
> and because of [0].  Are those lines - which were added by [1] - just wrong now?

Yes.  Sorry, I had missed that.  I tend to always use "autoreconf -fi".
Should we change `autogen.sh' to just do that?

Thanks,
Ludo'.

Re: branch_release-1-8 not building

[Neil Jerram]

2008/12/10 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
> "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> Fails very quickly in ./autogen.sh (see output below), I think because
>> of these lines in autogen.sh:
>>
>> cp -f config.guess config.sub build-aux/
>> cp -f config.guess config.sub guile-readline/
>>
>> and because of [0].  Are those lines - which were added by [1] - just wrong now?
>
> Yes.  Sorry, I had missed that.  I tend to always use "autoreconf -fi".
> Should we change `autogen.sh' to just do that?

Sure, if that's the right thing.  What about autogen.sh running
guile-readline/autogen.sh also?  Do we need that, or is the top level
autoreconf already recursing into the guile-readline tree?

   Neil

Re: branch_release-1-8 not building

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello,

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> 2008/12/10 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
>> "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Fails very quickly in ./autogen.sh (see output below), I think because
>>> of these lines in autogen.sh:
>>>
>>> cp -f config.guess config.sub build-aux/
>>> cp -f config.guess config.sub guile-readline/
>>>
>>> and because of [0].  Are those lines - which were added by [1] - just wrong now?
>>
>> Yes.  Sorry, I had missed that.  I tend to always use "autoreconf -fi".
>> Should we change `autogen.sh' to just do that?
>
> Sure, if that's the right thing.  What about autogen.sh running
> guile-readline/autogen.sh also?  Do we need that, or is the top level
> autoreconf already recursing into the guile-readline tree?

Yes, `autoreconf' recurses.  I'd happily live without `autogen.sh', but
feel free to update it to fit your needs.

Thanks,
Ludo'.

Re: branch_release-1-8 not building

[Neil Jerram]

2008/12/11 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
>
> Yes, `autoreconf' recurses.  I'd happily live without `autogen.sh', but
> feel free to update it to fit your needs.

Thanks, I've done that now.

Personally I do think it's useful to have a top level autogen.sh; it's
almost standard to have one, so I think it's a nice cue for new
developers.  (If we didn't have it, I guess we should instead document
our canonical build process in HACKING; that would be OK too IMO.)

    Neil