From: Richard Vaughan <vaughan@hr...> - 2003-04-22 21:42:48
I've installed a few boxes recently, and am thoroughly bored with having
to retrograde the autotools to bootstrap P/S.
How does everyone feel about moving everything to the new autotools
syntax? It should only affect the developers.
Information Sciences Lab, HRL Laboratories LLC.
vaughan@... (310) 317-5689
From: brian gerkey <bgerkey@us...> - 2003-04-23 01:04:07
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Richard Vaughan wrote:
> I've installed a few boxes recently, and am thoroughly bored with having
> to retrograde the autotools to bootstrap P/S.
Did you really have to retrograde the autotools? It was my understanding
that everything was backward (or forward?) compatible, in that what works with
old autotools will work with new autotools, albeit with more warnings. I've
tested (admittedly not recently) on a few systems on the SF.net compile farm
that have newer versions of the autotools and everything worked fine for me.
> How does everyone feel about moving everything to the new autotools
> syntax? It should only affect the developers.
I looked into this a while back, and concluded that the benefits were pretty
minor. One cost is that newer versions of automake take *very* long to run.
However, if you're having to install older versions just to work with P/S,
then that's a pretty significant benefit to upgrading.
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.