[Gnash] Re: Gnash: autotools generated files in CVS

[Sandro Santilli]

address@hidden in Cc]

On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 05:44:58PM -0700, Rob Savoye wrote:
> Sandro Santilli wrote:
> 
> >I just changed a Makefile.am, after running ./autogen.sh
> >lots of file result modified. Question is: should they
> >really be in CVS ? I'm used *not* to keep generated
> >things in CVS. What's the rationale for doing so ?
> > 
> >
>  As the files modification dates are changed, they get checked in, but 
> with no diff.

Running cvs update *before* the commit usually fixes this
(finds out there are no diff, and remove the M flag).

> I checked in a change last week so if you add any 
> arguments to autogen.sh, like "./autogen.sh foo", it only runs the 
> aclocal and autoconf part, and doesn't rebuild all the makefiles. 
> Optionally, you can run "aclocal -Imacros" or "autoconf" separately. 
> Autogen.sh is just for convienience.
> 
>  I usually check in configure and the other generated files since many 
> people used to not have the autotools installed. These days I'd think 
> anyone developing code would have these installed. I could go either way 
> on this, so maybe we should discuss it on the list.

I vote for taking them off to avoid confusion (like having generated
files marked as Modified even when nothing changed in the source
files - usually due to change in header stating the creator version
and date)

--strk;

 /"\    ASCII Ribbon Campaign
 \ /    Respect for low technology.
  X     Keep e-mail messages readable by any computer system.
 / \    Keep it ASCII.