| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Autotools update |
| Date: | 2005-07-02 22:42:02 |
| Message-ID: | 42C7183A.8010409@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jul 2005, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>> Does the FreeBSD one actually produce different output?
>>
>>
>> If it did not, why would they bother making a separate package called
>> "gnu-autoconf" with the note "This port is specifically designed for
>> developers that want to create cross-platform software distributions on
>> FreeBSD."?
>
>
> If it did produce different output, why haven't we noticed it prior to
> this? Has there actually *been* a problem that nobody has reported?
>
>
Is autoconf actually run as part of any of our packaging scripts? My
impression was that developers ran it and the committed the results
(e.g. a configure script), unlike, say, bison where the scripts for
tarballs have to call it. But then, of course I hardly know :-)
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-02 23:05:27 | Re: Constraint Exclusion (Partitioning) - Initial Review requested |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-07-02 22:29:28 | Re: Constraint Exclusion (Partitioning) - Initial Review requested |