Re: [Buddy-developers] bits to merge?

[Haim C. <hai...@us...>]

Thanks !

I have never used autoconf+automake+libtool before for projects, but I 
have read a bit about those scripts. Your contribution will be much 
appreciated.
I think that configure and Makefile.in files should be kept under CVS. 
Every tar I have downloaded, had these files in.
Could you please explain how do you generate the configure and 
Makefile.in files ? What exactly ( version numbers ) and how should I run ?
I have tried automake and autoconf, but it seems I do not use them 
correctly, or that I have old versions. configure was generated, but did 
not create Makefiles.
I am running Mandrake, and it seems it comes with old version of these 
tools.

Did you take into account the config file in the original project which 
defines label for the preprocessor ? I did not find it in your version 
with configure.

One more request : I have found there is a patch submitting system in 
SF. Could we use this opportunity that you send a patch to try it out ? 
I want to find out which kind of functionality it provides.

Thanks,
Haim

Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:

>Hi Haim,
>
>Sorry for the delay (it will happen again :)).
>
>  
>
>>>>"Haim" == Haim Cohen <hai...@us...> writes:
>>>>        
>>>>
>
>[...]
>
> Haim> Everyone have read access to the BuDDy repository in
> Haim> S.F. You should first checkout/read the current CVS
> Haim> repository.
>
>I'll generate all my patches against the CVS version of BuDDy.
>
> Haim> It would be great if you could first merge your changes
> Haim> into the BuDDy 2.3 and test them.
>
>I did that yesterday (i.e., I've imported BuDDy 2.3 into the Spot
>CVS repository and merge my changes).  (The result is in
>http://spot.lip6.fr/dl/spot-0.0v.tar.gz)
>
>I though it would be peanuts because CHANGES said nothing
>changed except the version, but it turned out I had other
>changes to cope with, besides the version bump: many examples
>were renamed, there is a new way of defining VERSION, ...
>
>I agree such changes do not belong to the CHANGES file (which
>looks like what GNU projects call NEWS), yet it would have saved
>me time to have a list of such changes, and I guess it would
>help other contributors too.  Maybe you could consider using a
>ChangeLog to keep track of every changes, like in GNU projects?
>(see also http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_40.html#SEC40)
>
>[...]
>
> Haim> I think that the build automation with autoconf should be the first
> Haim> thing to integrate into BuDDy.
>
>Wow, you're brave.  I though this would be the most
>controversial change!
>
>I have one question before I prepare a patch for this.  Do you
>want to keep generated files (configure, Makefile.in, ...) in CVS
>or not?  I personally keep them out of CVS, but see
>http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html#CVS
>before making your mind.
>
>
>By the meantime, here is a patch that fixes the following
>diagnostic output by the CVS version of Bison.  I guess its
>better to fix such things before changing the build.
>  
>