|
|
Blitz Support : |
From: Frank Schimmel (schimmel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-05 05:02:03
>>>>> Julian Cummings writes:
> Hi Todd,
> Well, the only "problem" is that the script may not work right on
> someone else's Linux box or other Unix box. Of course, you could
> run "autoreconf -fiv" to forcibly replace the files you got from cvs.
> In addition to configure, you would need to add aclocal.m4, autom4te.cache,
> config.guess, config.sub, depcomp, install-sh, ltmain.sh, missing and
> mkinstalldirs for completeness. It's a bit annoying to maintain all these
> files as changes are made to blitz. I'd prefer to keep the number of files
> to a minimum and let autoconf do all that work.
> Todd Veldhuizen wrote:
>> Okay.... but I still think we should minimally include a premade
>> "configure" script in cvs. Would this cause problems I'm unaware
>> of?
Concerning the inclusion of files like aclocal.m4, autom4te.cache,
config.guess, config.sub, depcomp, install-sh, ltmain.sh, missing and
mkinstalldirs in CVS: wouldn't this result in bogus "changes" due to
slightly different versions of the auto tools used by different
developers? I really don't like the inclusion of this kind of files in
version control...
I think the original problem was that aclocal did not find the libtool
M4 files. Todd, can you do a "ls `aclocal --print-ac-dir`/libtool.m4"?
That's where libtool.m4 should be if all the auto tools are set up
properly. (Here they aren't but I know how to cope with that...)
If libtool.m4 isn't there than maybe passing -I whateverdiritsin to
autoreconf does it? Or the symlinking mentioned before. But neither is
a solution to put on the web page...
What about just dumping shared library support and thereby libtool?
The static lib isn't really that big anyway (libblitz.a is just 18k on
this solaris box).
So: is a shared lib really needed? Opinions?
-Frank