Re: My experiences building GNATS 4.1.0

Chad Walstrom <[email protected]> Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:59:11 -0600

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.bug-tracking.gnats.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

By the way, it isn't GNATS 4.10.  You're about 9 releases in the future.
;-)

On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 10:21:44AM +0200, Mike M. Volokhov wrote:
> Another question is why build process so unclean (missing .c files,
> missing variables, some "magic" explicit rules at the end of makefile,
> and so on)?

Historical remnants.

> IMHO we should cleanup makefiles to be compliant to generic make rules
> or use GNU atomake framework (but I'm personally are not familiar with
> GNU build tools). Which way more preferred?

I would like to see a migration to automake and a single configure.ac
file.  However, I didn't want to hold up rolling out 4.1.0 any longer
than necessary.  Now that we've reached that milestone, we can look into
cleaning it up a bit more.

-- 
Chad Walstrom <[email protected]>           http://www.wookimus.net/
           assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */

_______________________________________________
Help-gnats mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnats

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 189 B)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCQaBfDMcLGCBsWv0RAjHYAJ9gJd+9BxCpu1zQO0K3R1E0CG96IQCfZP65
2qnLHG5LWuG+J/vVbOxEz70=
=SAcR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----