[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: buld mig fail

From: Niels Möller
Subject: Re: buld mig fail
Date: 25 Jan 2004 10:44:35 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

elf@land5.nsu.ru (Dmitry V. Zhulanov) writes:

> > Files that are automatically generated, or which come with automake,
> > are often *not* checked into cvs. mig uses automake, right? Then use
> > automake -a to install the missing files.

>       Should configure script do that, or INSTALL should be updated?

No, and no. INSTALL describes how _end users_ are supposed to install
the software from a released distribution. Then all system independent
generated files should be included, like configure, config.h.in and
Makefile.in, and all needed automake scripts like "debcomp" and
"missing", etc should also be included. Nothing more then ./configure
&& make should be needed. One should *not* require the end user to
have automake and autoconf installed on his or her system.

I think this is described in more detail in either the GNU coding
standards or the automake manual.

However, if you get the code from CVS, you don't have a properly
prepared _distribution_, and the build process is usually a little
more complicated, and less standardized. You have to find the CVS
build instructions, or be familiar with the developer tools that are
used for the package in question. For some packages, autoreconf is
sufficient to prepare a tree that's been checked out from CVS, others
require you to run aclocal, automake, autoconf and autoheader
manually, and again others have some custom bootstrapping script to do
what's needed.

I've only ever built mig from a release tarball, so I can't be more
specific about what's needed for mig.


reply via email to

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