Re: [Quilt-dev] Re: My current quilt 0.21 :)

[James Rowe]

Hey,

  I am blaming the whole of yesterday on the snow, and my 5 hour train
ride to go 25(!) miles.

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 18:06:54 +0100
Andreas Gruenbacher <address@hidden> wrote:

> >   See attached stupidly long name patch.  I've also removed the sed
> > from the new.in because stripit() is called on the next line anyway.
> 
> No patch is attached it seems.

  Yeah, that was a big oops.  I didn't actually check it had attached, I
just trusted a '-a patchscripts-envvar-fix.patch'.

> >   I've not really tried to break it that much, so it possibly still
> > does break, as I am implementing a new handler for $P now.
> >
> >   There is an initial version of the autoconf/make enabled quilt at
> > http://www.jnrowe.uklinux.net/files/quilt-0.21.1.tar.bz2
> 
> Hmmm. I don't find that file either.

  Now this one was almost there, I had put it in the base dir and then
type /files/ in the mail without thinking.

> >   It is missing quite a few needed features, for example docs aren't
> > installed or generated(I'm looking in to a new method first).
> 
> The configure.in isn't supposed to install anything, it shall only 
> figure out a few paths to utilities and how to run the C compiler, and
> 
> generate from a Makefile.in a proper Makefile. The Makefile.in
> contains placeholders for @DIFF@ etc. instead of the hard
> coded path names that are in the current Makefile. That's all.

  I was using Makefile.am's and that was what I was talking about there.
 It appears that you feel the Makefile.in is a better idea, so I am
changing it over now.

> >  It is
> > just to show you all that some work is actually being done here ;) 
> > I am probably going to ditch quite a few of the tests too(C based)
> > once I have checked it on a few archs to see which ones should be
> > used(expect a small patch to backupfiles by the looks of it).
> 
> >  And
> > that brings me on to one other thing.  backup-files has been renamed
> > to backupfiles because automake is a little restrictive.
> 
> Huh? What does Automake even have to know about backup-files? I don't 
> understand.

  Non-point now that automake has been removed from the equation.

Jay 

-- 

www.jnrowe.uklinux.net
GnuPG key fingerprint = 7721 D12B 822B 20FE FCE6  B2B7 7CDF C9DF D16A
87D7

pgpWzkZt9dB0E.pgp
Description: PGP signature