From: Simon <si...@si...> - 2012-11-15 10:42:13
|
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:00:28 +1000 From: David Seikel <on...@gm...> Subject: Re: [E-devel] Automake 1.11 To: enl...@li... Message-ID: <201...@gm...> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:53:06 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <ra...@ra...> wrote: >> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:59:18 +1000 David Seikel <on...@gm...> >> said: >> >>> Simon even mentioned that it's his work system that has this >>> problem. It's very likely that some company provided systems are >>> locked down to specific versions of development tools for the >>> companies own reasons. Say for instance to provide a common >>> development environment for all the developers. He might not be >>> allowed to upgrade automake. >> you dont need to be root to upgrade it. don't be silly. if you're a >> developer you can happily upgrade automake all you like - as long as >> whatever you want to upgrade doesn't need root privs (setuid root for >> example), you can do it. > I did not mention root. Could be "locked down" based on the boss > saying "Thou shalt use version X, and only version X, on pain of being > fired.". > We'll im glad to see i have generated some lively discussion, Lucas told me what i needed to know which is why automake is required so tomorrow i will install it in the home directory of my local user. The reason i don't upgrade is our development environment is interesting and old to say the least, for version control we use some web forms based on a bunch of scripts based on teamware and sccs running on a solaris server. Upgrading past Ubuntu 10.10 seems to break this setup, in short i don't know how most of our systems work, i don't want to know how they work and i figure the less i touch and change things the less likely they are to break. I do also know i have network drives mapped to some common install paths for build tools and that is more likely to break things. So if i didn't need to i was happy not to upgrade. I guess we will also make a automake package for SLES at the right version. In all honesty if i was in Rasters position i would have just said you need to upgrade so i know where your coming from. Cheers, Simon |
From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2012-11-15 12:30:43
|
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:11:50 +1030 Simon <si...@si...> said: > Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:00:28 +1000 From: David Seikel > <on...@gm...> Subject: Re: [E-devel] Automake 1.11 To: > enl...@li... Message-ID: > <201...@gm...> Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:53:06 +0900 Carsten Haitzler > (The Rasterman) <ra...@ra...> wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:59:18 +1000 David Seikel <on...@gm...> > >> said: > >> > >>> Simon even mentioned that it's his work system that has this > >>> problem. It's very likely that some company provided systems are > >>> locked down to specific versions of development tools for the > >>> companies own reasons. Say for instance to provide a common > >>> development environment for all the developers. He might not be > >>> allowed to upgrade automake. > >> you dont need to be root to upgrade it. don't be silly. if you're a > >> developer you can happily upgrade automake all you like - as long as > >> whatever you want to upgrade doesn't need root privs (setuid root for > >> example), you can do it. > > I did not mention root. Could be "locked down" based on the boss > > saying "Thou shalt use version X, and only version X, on pain of being > > fired.". > > > We'll im glad to see i have generated some lively discussion, Lucas told > me what i needed to know which is why automake is required so tomorrow i > will install it in the home directory of my local user. The reason i > don't upgrade is our development environment is interesting and old to > say the least, for version control we use some web forms based on a > bunch of scripts based on teamware and sccs running on a solaris server. > Upgrading past Ubuntu 10.10 seems to break this setup, in short i don't > know how most of our systems work, i don't want to know how they work > and i figure the less i touch and change things the less likely they are > to break. I do also know i have network drives mapped to some common > install paths for build tools and that is more likely to break things. > So if i didn't need to i was happy not to upgrade. I guess we will also > make a automake package for SLES at the right version. > In all honesty if i was in Rasters position i would have just said you > need to upgrade so i know where your coming from. that's kind of the position - if you are a DEVELOPER.. upgrade. move with the times for TOOLS. HOW.. you do this.. is a matter for you - given what you say, you have a "fragile" os environment to support other stuff for work, then its easy to put any upgraded stuff in ~/mystuff or whatever and make them preferred with $PATH and $LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc. when and if required (have a small shells script your source that does this). then they only impact your shell env etc. once you configure it - otherwise they are just some disk space cruft in ~/ :) assuming you use efl and e.. you have enough cruft there, so this isn't a problem. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... |