Re: [PATCH] Fix compiling on CentOS 7.

[Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org>]

Ludovic Courtès writes:

> Hi!
>
> Roel Janssen <roel@gnu.org> skribis:
>
>> Alex Kost writes:
>>
>>> Tomáš Čech (2016-08-27 09:57 +0300) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 09:48:36PM +0200, Roel Janssen wrote:
>>>>>Dear Guix,
>>>>>
>>>>>Due to an old Automake version (1.13), running the `./configure' phase on
>>>>>CentOS 7 fails with:
>>>>>
>>>>>> autoreconf: running: automake --add-missing --copy --force-missing
>>>>>> configure.ac:21: warning: The 'AM_PROG_MKDIR_P' macro is deprecated, and its use is discouraged.
>>>>>> configure.ac:21: You should use the Autoconf-provided 'AC_PROG_MKDIR_P' macro instead,
>>>>>> configure.ac:21: and use '$(MKDIR_P)' instead of '$(mkdir_p)'in your Makefile.am files.
>>>>>> Makefile.am:422: warning: AM_GNU_GETTEXT used but 'po' not in SUBDIRS
>>>>>> automake: error: cannot open < ./%D%/guix.texi: No such file or directory
>>>>>> autoreconf: automake failed with exit status: 1
>>>>>
>>>>>(It does not replace %D% with the appropriate directory..)
>>>>>
>>>>>The attached patch replaces each instance of %D%, which I believe stands
>>>>>for the current subdirectory from the project root, with the appropriate
>>>>>directory.  With these changes, I've been able to compile GNU Guix on
>>>>>CentOS 7.
>>>>>
>>>>>I am not sure how this change impacts custom configure options, so I
>>>>>would like to ask someone with more Automake knowledge and experience to
>>>>>elaborate on the possible downsides of applying this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>If this change is acceptable to the project, I will update the commit
>>>>>message to a more detailed and conforming message.  Suggestions are
>>>>>welcome here though.
>>>>>
>>>>>What do you think about making Guix compilable on this "stable"
>>>>>distribution? :-)
>>>>
>>>> I'd prefer to keep this patch in CentOS (or similar distribution with
>>>> outdated software) as distro specific. I can assume that CentOS 8
>>>> won't need it and you can just drop it for newer releases.
>>>
>>> I also think this patch should stay on the CentOS side.  Roel, what you
>>> suggest is a revert of commit c0d2e7b:
>>>
>>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=c0d2e7b197a3c511eb1bf60b61ee6fdc673e36f4
>>
>> Ha! I  hadn't seen that commit.  It is indeed a revert of this commit.
>>
>> Let me rephrase my thought:
>> I don't see any good reason to break compatibility with well established
>> distributions.  And the commit message does not state why a macro is
>> better than spelling out the relative path.
>
> Use of %D% was discussed here:
>
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-05/msg00641.html
>
> In general, I’m in favor of using the latest build tools available (the
> autotools), because I think it’s reasonable to ask developers to have
> the latest available.  If needed, they can install the Guix binary
> tarball and get the latest tools from there.

So, for CentOS 7 users you suggest that to compile GNU Guix, people need
to first install the GNU Guix binary?  Is that really easier than
applying and maintaining this change?  I think that we should support
the version of Automake shipped with CentOS 7.

> Now, I also agree that we don’t want to needlessly break compatibility.
>
> This particular case looks borderline to me.  I’m in favor of the status
> quo, at least to avoid all the merge conflicts that reverting would
> entail, and because the workarounds that Tomáš and Florian suggest look
> reasonable.

Right, so that will result in us not being able to compile GNU Guix on
CentOS 7 without additional instructions. (I do not intend to create and
maintain an RPM.  I want to use the Guix package management system, not
RPM!)

The patch is really simple, so it should be simple to apply, in whatever
form.

> WDYT?

So, what we're having here is kind of anti-GNU:  We prefer the
developer's comfort (for unlikely but possible future maintenance
burden) over the user's comfort (for getting GNU Guix to compile on a
well established distribution).

As it seems to be very difficult to fix a simple issue, I think I'll
just have to give up trying.

Thanks for the replies.

Kind regards,
Roel Janssen