On 26.07.2010 17:32, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 7/26/2010 10:10 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
On 26.07.2010 15:47, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 7/26/2010 5:30 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
I'm a bit undecided whether to port some changes between APR and
APR-UTIL branches:
- r780882 (wrowe): fix vpath building for xml/expat (removing
"configure" target in Makefile.in)
The change is in the 1.3.x branch, but neither in any older nor newer
branches.
I think forward porting is fine, this wasn't much more than an mkdir,
right?
You removed running autoconf to create configure:
@@ -52,8 +52,6 @@
top_builddir = .
-AUTOCONF = autoconf
-
INSTALL = @INSTALL@
INSTALL_PROGRAM = @INSTALL_PROGRAM@
INSTALL_DATA = @INSTALL_DATA@
@@ -98,9 +96,6 @@
$(SHELL) configure ; \
fi
-configure: configure.in
- $(AUTOCONF)
-
config.h: config.h.in config.status
CONFIG_FILES= CONFIG_HEADERS=$(CONFIG_HEADERS) \
$(SHELL) ./config.status
Sorry, I should have read more closely before sending.
autoconf is a packaging tool. Not a build too. This didn't belong in Makefile,
since it's simple enough to have small timing issues when checking out or
unpacking
files from an archive, which triggers such innocuous looking statements.
Forward porting would be terrific;
OK
does this issue even exist on 0.9 branch though?
Yes:
% cksum apr-util/branches/?.?.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/0.9.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/1.0.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/1.1.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/1.2.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
753950660 3724 apr-util/branches/1.3.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/1.4.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
285877461 3783 apr-util/branches/1.5.x/xml/expat/Makefile.in
All branches are identical to the version before your change.
Regards,
Rainer
