On 08/16/2012 02:04 PM, Javier Jardón wrote: > Hello, > > Im working on port GNOME moduels to use autoreconf instead our own > tool, gnome-autogen [1] (they do almost the same, but gnome-autogen > was created before autoreconf exist) A bit of research shows that you got some facts mixed up. gnome-autogen.sh was created (as autogen.sh) in 2000: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-common/commit/macros2/autogen.sh?id=7d133ecfaf798c274fa0fb978364fe45771fa0ba while autoreconf has existed since 1994: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/autoconf.git/commit/bin/autoreconf.in?id=cdf79c42edd28b4972535fdcc1160f402a6d6a29 > But now I have to stop, as some developers complain because > gnome-autogen is still useful for us as it check for the presence of > these packages: > > - intltool [1] > - gtk-doc [2] > - yelp-tools [3] > > (Almost all the GNOME modules depends at least on one of those) > My question is if the check for these modules could be added to autoreconf. > If yes, Id happry to start continue porting all the GNOME modules to > the "upstream" tool If you are willing to write patches to autoreconf to incorporate new tools into the common autotools, then we will gladly review them. But I probably won't write those patches. GNOME isn't the only project to have an initial checkout script that wraps not only autoreconf but several other tools; gnulib is a primary example of this, where many gnulib clients (such as GNU coreutils) don't directly use autoreconf. Note that many packages name their initial script 'bootstrap' rather than a variant of 'autogen', so as to avoid confusion with the actual 'AutoGen' package. -- Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
