-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to js_bach@xxxxxxxxxx on 8/21/2008 6:51 AM: >> If it's _his_ source code (and assuming that _he_ licensed it GPL), he can >> distribute whatever set of files he chooses. The restriction applies for >> files that he gets from someone else. >> > yes it's pure my code and i haven't licenced it yet(didn't have time for that). Please consider using the GPL, then, as it affords your users the most freedom in using your software. However, autoconf _does_ allow you the option of using another license of your choosing. > Having > cleared that, has anyone hints for the minimum set of files for autotooling? Your terminology is a bit confused. The minimum set of files needed for autotooling is configure.ac and Makefile.am (ie. the input files used by autoreconf --install); other files like config.h.in are optional. But it sounds like you are asking for what you can avoid distributing, if you want to make it impossible for the user to re-autotool your package. > Besides of those files mentioned in subject, i'd not like to deliver any files which > could be recovered by ./configure. The only files built by ./configure are Makefile and anything else listed in AC_CONFIG_FILES. And those generated files should NOT be distributed in the first place, only their inputs. In other words, the generated Makefile on your platform will not work on someone else's platform; ./configure requires that you distribute Makefile.in and then it builds Makefile. But automake already does this for you (distributes Makefile.in but not Makefile). Meanwhile, other files which are added by automake during autotooling, such as config.guess, are not regenerated by ./configure; if you fail to distribute them after automake has gone to the effort of including it, you are distributing a broken package. > As files are so many and I am unexperienced > in autotooling, it gets difficult to test one by one. I repeat my first observation: distribute those files that Automake selects for you, and don't waste your time trying to second-guess things. That is the easiest course for you, and gives your users the most freedom. And just because you distribute these extra files does not mean the user has to care about them; the autotools intentionally produce output files that do not rely on the existence of the autotools to be useful on the user's machine. If you are really worried about the minimum distribution, then only give your users pre-built binaries (without seeing any of your source); but don't use the GPL in that case. And taken to that extreme, you won't even have to use autotools (if you don't distribute source, then using autotools to find out about the platform where you pre-build binaries is overkill). Sound crazy? Then realize that if you care about giving your users the ability to recompile your program and fix bugs, you shouldn't limit their ability to re-autotool your package. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake ebb9@xxxxxxx -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkitbJMACgkQ84KuGfSFAYDwjwCgn8BU0B0QIFiLWmSwhR4Lgxkf vFgAoI9scny4bzlZiBac0reYEicTDopP =0DYx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
