On 12-10-2007 15:11:34 +0200, Stefan Manegold wrote:
> Obviously, having .mx.in files in the CVS sources does not make much sense,
> at least not in combination with source distributions (tarballs).
>
> ...
>
> Not that "obvious" --- well, maybe a short recap of the build process helps:
>
> 1) @...@ placeholdes in .in files are replace by configure.
> 2) .mx files are extracted/expanded by Mx when compiling from CVS sources.
> 3) tarballs are supposed to be compiled w/o Mx, hence, they contain the
> Mx-extracted/-expanded files
> ("obviously" including the "hard-wired" @...@ replacements as done by the
> configure of that preceeded the building of the source tarball).
I recall that .in.mx didn't work out well for some reason. I'll try
that out if/once I have time for it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Monetdb-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
