From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
To: Ross Burton <ross@burtonini.com>
Cc: Gnulib bugs <bug-gnulib@gnu.org>, Autoconf <autoconf@gnu.org>,
Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
Subject: Re: Request to revert the C version change
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 12:09:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKCAbMj3zOd0+8BA6z56zdisZMJJp0VCjdFKNS43p2SrfjhqDQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAnfSTv5Js_RkKywwdDqchdDH6L00vLLxX4UUYfNtZ8P5VUtPw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:54 AM Ross Burton <ross@burtonini.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 16:46, Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org> wrote:
>> This patch is already in Gnulib since 2020-12-09. But when people
>> run 'autoreconf' on an existing released tarball, they are effectively
>> combining an older Gnulib with a newest Autoconf.
>>
>> Why do people do that? The point of tarballs is that you can run
>> './configure' right away.
>>
>> If people want to modify the build infrastructure, it would often be
>> more reasonable to start off the git repository of the package (possibly
>> from a specific release tag or release branch).
>
> Because it’s not uncommon to need newer config.status, or updated m4 files, or to patch Makefile.am or configure.ac.
Also, in my experience downstream redistributors prefer to work from
tarballs, for several different reasons: tarballs tend to come with
more provenance information (e.g. PGP signatures); working from a git
checkout may require any number of unusual tools that aren't required
for tarball releases; figuring out exactly which git commit
corresponds to a tarball is often more difficult than it ought to be;
and so on.
I'm not happy about needing to kludge backward compatibility with the
older std-gnu11.m4 into autoconf 2.70.1 but I'm going to do it.
zw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-20 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAAnfSTuEDX_Wv+GtdRuRVtr72qP5oZQEJ12BVOMyTHx9mtMNCg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAKCAbMic4FXC-aDz1BRXH6T-obyQEbTLKCA1-YFc-82jDbF6Fg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAAnfSTu5zYm=4zrpHf-i8x9tyXBLJ-4yy+BJLKM-HFncLvm3zw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAKCAbMjSsJK8hkgkT+OTGcOrUqJGUvptZmK3AeC9ZsmVGAD1TQ@mail.gmail.com>
2020-12-20 14:49 ` Request to revert the C version change Zack Weinberg
2020-12-20 16:46 ` Bruno Haible
2020-12-20 16:54 ` Ross Burton
2020-12-20 17:09 ` Zack Weinberg [this message]
2020-12-20 17:48 ` Zack Weinberg
2020-12-23 19:20 ` Zack Weinberg
2021-01-04 14:23 ` Ross Burton
2020-12-20 17:02 ` Zack Weinberg
2020-12-23 20:04 ` gnulib / autoconf sync Bruno Haible
2020-12-23 20:13 ` Bruno Haible
2020-12-24 0:58 ` Autoconf version number after 2.70 Paul Eggert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAKCAbMj3zOd0+8BA6z56zdisZMJJp0VCjdFKNS43p2SrfjhqDQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=zackw@panix.com \
--cc=autoconf@gnu.org \
--cc=bruno@clisp.org \
--cc=bug-gnulib@gnu.org \
--cc=ross@burtonini.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).