Bob Rossi wrote: > OK, now thats wierd [sic]. If I'm going to make people install > texinfo, then I should apparently just make them go the extra > mile and install the autotools? Not necessarily. If you've committed the generated `configure' script, and a complete set of `Makefile.in' templates, then your users don't need the autotools. If you haven't, then your users *will* require the autotools, and at a version which is fully compatible with yours. If you force your users down this route, then you effectively make all users of CVS become de facto developers for your project; many will not thank you for that. OTOH, texinfo isn't a software development tool per se; it's a text formatting tool, used for publishing text files in .info format; (yes those text files need to have appropriate mark up codes inserted, in much the same way as say HTML, to control the formatter). At the end of the day, it's your choice how much generated content you commit into CVS. If your users want .info files, then either you must provide them ready made, or you must ask your CVS users to install texinfo. Alternatively, you could give them an option, such as `--without-info', to let them skip the generation of the .info files, or even let `configure' automatically skip the .info files, if texinfo isn't installed. Another option is to offer a prepackaged tarball of .info files, which your users can merge into their build tree, prior to initiating a CVS build. When you come to create your distribution tarball, you will want to include all those generated files, which cannot be generated locally, without installing additional tools, beyond the minimal set mandated by the GNU Coding Standards. HTH. Regards, Keith. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
