Re: [Plplot-devel] The infamous "missing" strikes again

[Joao C. <jc...@fe...>]

On Monday 03 March 2003 23:52, Alan W. Irwin wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > * Joao Cardoso <jc...@fe...> [2003-03-03 20:53]:
> > > After a fresh cvs checkout, running bootstrap.sh
> > >
> > > [jcard@feup] ./bootstrap.sh
> > > Running aclocal (GNU automake) 1.7.2... done
> > > Running autoheader (GNU Autoconf) 2.57... done
> > > Running automake (GNU automake) 1.7.2... done
> > > Running libtoolize (GNU libtool) 1.4.3... done
> > > Running autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.57... done
> > >
> > > taring, ftp to an  alphaev6-dec-osf4.0f system, untaring and runnin=
g
> > > configure gave several errors:
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > This technique is error-prone.  The correct approach is to generate a
> > tarball with "make dist".  Unfortunately, make dist does not work
> > perfectly yet (but will for the next release, hopefully).
>
> I agree you do have to be careful with making a tarball, but on the oth=
er
> hand it is almost as straightforward as avoiding pitfalls when developi=
ng
> with cvs.  You must start with a clean tree, and you need the correct
> version of swig and autotools on your system where you are preparing th=
e
> tarball.  The only peculiar thing is two files need to be touched if yo=
u
> are not using my script.
>
> Note that scripts/make_tarball.sh touches two files so that autotools a=
re
> not invoked on the system where the tarball is being used.

I don't want to make a distro, just be able to quickly test on another=20
architecture (I'm concerned with NaN stuff in nn/csa/plgridd.c).

Alan receipt, "touch plConfig.h.in  plDevs.h.in", is enough for my needs.

Thanks,
Joao