[fetchmail-devel] Re: fetchmail loaded into berlios svn repository; mailing lists

[Matthias A. <ma...@dt...>]

Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> writes:

> Matthias Andree wrote:
>> Makefile.in.in is a generated file.
>
> In that case I guess we should remove it from svn.  I'm sure there are 
> more.  (I've already noticed that some diffs and .orig/.rej files made it 
> in there and should be removed.)

They're gone now:

|Deleting       fetchmail.diff
|Deleting       fr.po.orig
|Deleting       fr.po.rej
|Deleting       pl.po.orig
|Deleting       pl.po.rej
|
|Committed revision 3884.

I'm not comfortable with removing Makefile.in.in, it appears to have
local changes by ESR, and replacing it with the one from gettext 0.13
broke the build horribly. This is one of the files that needs a
"--force" to generate (in gettextize) besides that, as I figured.

IOW, this is delicate, I'm not touching it, for I know too little about
gettext and don't want to learn gettext this month if I can help it.

>> gettext.info suggests listing the source file rather than a generated
>> file, hence:
>> The newer autoconf versions are better, but I wonder if you would want
>> the bild super structure replaced, I'd suggest deferring that to 6.2.7.
>
> Of course, one problem with removing generated files from svn is that we 
> end up with different autoconf versions being used.  I have autoconf
> 2.59.

So do I.

>> I've commited the ok = 0 initialization in one change, the warning fixes
>> in another and haven't yet committed the POTFILES.in patch, different
>> suggestion above. It adds an xgettext warning but fixes the build.
>
> It'd be nice to get rid of the warning if possible, but if the resulting 
> code handles translation properly then it's probably no big deal.

We'd introduce more local changes into files that gettextize has
provided, which isn't very sensible as it is maintenance intensive.

-- 
Matthias Andree

Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95