[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: git-version-gen and 'make install'

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: git-version-gen and 'make install'
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:13:15 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-07-21)

* Eric Blake wrote on Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 02:24:53PM CEST:
> According to Bruno Haible on 7/21/2008 5:05 PM:
> > 
> > A) Reduce your expectations, and accept that modified programs show the same
> >    version number as the unmodified programs. Like it was for the last 20
> >    years. When users want to test a modification in a 
> > "modify-compile-install-
> >    test" cycle, they are not interested in the output of the --version 
> > option.
> Which is exactly what GNUmakefile currently does - the version string is
> stale during development, and only updated at interesting moments (and
> with recent changes, you can use cfg.mk to define which moments are
> interesting in your development cycle).

Except that GNUmakefile's way of doing it is such an, err, leaky
abstraction.  Since its incantation, it needed several iterations,
and I think everyone even agrees that it's far from perfect still
(and probably not bug-free either).

> > B) Change the build process of your package so that a change in the version
> >    number results in less recompilations. That means, in particular:
> >    *Don't* use VERSION and PACKAGE_VERSION any more.
> Yes, that is the direction that I think we should eventually reach, but it
> takes coordination between the autotools, as well as a design that
> everyone is happy with.

Not as far as I see.  There are very simple solutions that need no
coordination with autotools at all.


reply via email to

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