Re: [Pcb2gcode-devel] status update...

[Patrick B. <pbi...@us...>]

On 11/30/2010 03:08 PM, chrysn wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 01:48:33AM +0100, chrysn wrote:
>> i saw it made its way back in -- were there problems? (besides, when i
>> do an `autoreconf`, not only Makefile.in, but also aclocal.m4 and
>> configure change, so they might be in for removal as well, as is the
>> "missing" file. the sequence for building then becomes `autoreconf`,
>> `./configure` etc.; but i'm talking about tools i don't understand here,
>> so maybe i'm all wrong.
>
> i've dug a bit deeper now, and created a commit that should get rid of
> all the generated files [1533e473]. the remaining issue with INSTALL (it
> is overwritten automatically by autotools, removing the custom section
> about quick installation) was resolved in [2459ec3dd2].
>
> another commit [ae710b583e9] tries to reduce dependencies and libraries
> linked in, but with hardly any result (a single library gets dropped by
> moving from gtk to glib+gdkmm).

Makefile.in is needed by configure, I didn't pay enough attention when I 
removed it.
Are you sure it's a good idea to remove configure and the associated 
files? Most programs can be installed using the usual
./configure && make && sudo make install
command, and I don't want to unnecessarily complicate the installation 
procedure if I can avoid it. Sure, running autoreconf isn't that much 
effort, but I'm a bit concerned about how well everything will work with 
different versions of libtool, m4, the autotools, etc. If the finished 
configure script is included, everything's fine.

Anyway, what's your opinion?