[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: automake parallel install

From: Tom Tromey
Subject: Re: automake parallel install
Date: 13 Jan 2002 14:14:52 -0700

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:

Tom> But I'm not as sure about renaming the executables by default.  I
Tom> think I'd prefer to simply install as `automake', and let package
Tom> maintainers use `--program-suffix=-1.5' (or equivalent) in their
Tom> spec files.  What do you think of that?

Ok, now I'm convinced that we need to install the versioned
executables.  It is the only way to get consistent results across all
platforms using the default install behavior.

Tom> One issue is what we put in the rebuild rules in the Makefile.

My current thinking is that we would name the installed version and
the install directories after the "install version".  For anything in
the 1.5 series (1.5.1, 1.5-p1, 1.5c, whatever), this would be "1.5".
Then we would guarantee that for a given "install version" we would
only do bug fixes.

So for instance you couldn't install 1.5 and 1.5.1 at the same time.
You'd simply have to upgrade in this situation.

My rationale for this is that often you can use a slightly older
version.  So forcing everybody to upgrade to 1.5.2 or whatever, unless
it is really required (something that can be specified in
AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS), is a bit unfriendly.

Any comments on this?

Tom> I think the rebuild rule problem is even worse if autoconf is
Tom> versioned.  Where will the version info come from?

Still no solution here :-(


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]