Re: [Quickfix-developers] Updated include paths

[Alex H. <al...@an...>]

Hi Oren,

I've moved it back to configure.in for now as we need to get builds
running again.

If you have both configure.ac and configure.in then the autoconf tools
complain...

Will you be able to install newer autotools versions on your build
machines in the foreseeable future? (e.g. by installing them in
/opt/autotools-1 and adding /opt/autotools-1/bin to your PATH ahead of
/usr/bin ).

Cheers,
Alex.


On Tue, 2003-05-06 at 17:40, Oren Miller wrote:
> Yeah, but the reason that we have multiple build machines is that we need=
 to be sure that QF development can be done on all those environments.
> The tools they use are still very widespread and I would like to
support them for some time. I think we basically have two options.  We
can revert to using configure.in instead of configure.ac.  GNU wants to
push people to using .ac, but .in is still fully supported. The other
option is the have bootstrap create a configure.in symlink to
configure.ac.  Newer versions of autoconf will ignore the .in file,
while older versions will also work fine. Let me know if you can think
of any other options.
>=20
> Alex Hornby <al...@an...> wrote:
> Hi Oren,
>=20
> What would you like to do about the bootstrap?
>=20
> I notice you had a GCC 3.2 machine in the cruise control setup at one
> point. Assuming that was RH8 the autotools that come with that are
> recent enough to bootstrap.
>=20
> Cheers,
> Alex.
>=20
> On Tue, 2003-05-06 at 14:09, Oren Miller wrote:
> > bootstrap is run with every build. You can see here
> > in the build output:=20
> > http://quickfix.thoughtworks.com/cchtml/linux_pgcc_2_95_2.html#OUT
> >=20
> > That it is complaining because configure.in no longer
> > exists. It looks like you replaced it with
> > configure.ac, but older versions of autoconf (which
> > those machines are running) need the .in
> >=20
> > Is there a difference between the .ac and the .in
> > version formatwise? Can we set up a symlink in the
> > bootstrap script if an older version of autoconf is
> > detected?
> >=20
> > --- Alex Hornby wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2003-05-06 at 12:38, Joerg Thoennes wrote:
> > >=20
> > > > According to the build page
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > >
> > http://quickfix.thoughtworks.com/cchtml/linux_pgcc_2_95_2.html
> > > >=20
> > > > your last checkin somehow broke the Cruisecontrol
> > > build. Did you check this?
> > > >=20
> > > > Cheers J=F6rg
> > > >=20
> > > >
> > >=20
> > > Hi J=F6rg,
> > >=20
> > > How does cruise control kick off the build?
> > >=20
> > > I think I need to get it to run the bootstrap script
> > > at least once to
> > > regenerate stuff...
> > >=20
> > > Alex.
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Quickfix-developers mailing list
> > > Qui...@li...
> > >
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
> >=20
> >=20
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >=20
> >=20
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> > _______________________________________________
> > Quickfix-developers mailing list
> > Qui...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/quickfix-developers
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.