Fwd: [Automake] Including Dynamic libraries and java functionality in makefile.

2012-10-08 Thread Sujit Devkar
Dear Sir/Madam, I am working on autotools. I was using shell script to compile my c++ project. My shell script is g++ -I/usr/abc/inc -L/usr/abc/lib abc.cpp -lsrl -o abc works perfectly well. I need to use this in autoconf. Also I use .java files in the project and I use gcj --main=example

[Autoconf] Including Files in configure.ac and makefile.am

2012-10-08 Thread Sujit Devkar
Dear Sir/Madam, I am working on autotools. I was using shell script to compile my c++ project. My shell script is g++ -I/usr/abc/inc -L/usr/abc/lib abc.cpp -lsrl -o abc works perfectly well. I need to use this in autoconf. Also I use .java files in the project and I use gcj --main=example

[RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
Hi all, So, Debian is in the process of bringing up our upcoming arm64 port. Unfortunately we are also coming across lots of packages with rather outdated config.guess and config.sub files (see links below). We could patch every single package that contains config.guess and config.sub but that

Autoconf example scripts for site defaults

2012-10-08 Thread Harald Oehlmann
In respect to page: http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.67/html_node/Site-Defaults.html#Site-Defaults the last example did not work for me: --/usr/local/share/config.site-- test $libdir = '${exec_prefix}/lib' libdir='${exec_prefix}/lib64' --EOF-- There was a true required as

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Is there really any viable substitute for re-autotooling the packages, while modifying configure.ac, Makefiles, and source code as found to be required? Bob -- Bob

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Eric Blake
On 10/08/2012 06:46 AM, Paul Wise wrote: Hi all, So, Debian is in the process of bringing up our upcoming arm64 port. Unfortunately we are also coming across lots of packages with rather outdated config.guess and config.sub files (see links below). We could patch every single package that

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 10:22 -0600, Eric Blake wrote: Not to discourage you, but I still see a fundamental problem, where things will just not scale for several more years (if ever). Your proposed patch will have no effect on packages that were shipped with a configure script generated by

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 11:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Yes. The problem is that we have to repeat this process for every package every time we want to bootstrap a new

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Paul Wise wrote: On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 11:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Yes. The problem is that we have to repeat this process for every package

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Russ Allbery
Paul Wise pa...@bonedaddy.net writes: In the meantime, within Debian we will be pursuing both per-package updating of config.guess/sub and I'm also thinking about getting our binary package build toolchain to take that role, but I'm not sure how well that would be received within Debian or

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Russ Allbery
Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us writes: Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Believe it or not, yes, frequently it does. Note that this is specifically in the context of Debian, which means that

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Paul Wise wrote: On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 11:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Yes. The problem is that we have to repeat this process for every package

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: CONFIG_SITE and CONFIG_SHELL)? For example, there could be CONFIG_SITE and CONFIG_SUB environment variables. This approach would allow the package I meant CONFIG_GUESS and CONFIG_SUB of course. :-) Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Mon, 08 Oct 2012, Russ Allbery wrote: Personally, I've already started converting every package I maintain that uses Autoconf to using dh_autoreconf during the build. I wonder if that isn't a better long-term solution for Debian. config.guess/config.sub have caused the most frequent

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 12:26 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Personally, I've already started converting every package I maintain that uses Autoconf to using dh_autoreconf during the build. Likewise. I wonder if that isn't a better long-term solution for Debian. It is, but for DFSG item 2 reasons

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 18:40 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: Well, as far as I am concerned, we should axe from the [next] Debian stable distro anything that doesn't retool completely before the build, IMO just updating config.sub/guess is not nearly enough. I think thats going a bit

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 13:52 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: While replacing config.guess/sub gets over the first hurdle, there are surely additional hurdles to be encountered which might render getting past the first hurdle to be moot. Agreed, the key here is to not give up before starting.

Re: [RFC] getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Wookey
+++ Russ Allbery [2012-10-08 12:32 -0700]: Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us writes: Does simple replacement of config.guess and config.sub constitute a useful port to this previously unencountered target? Believe it or not, yes, frequently it does. Note that this is

[Autoconf] Including Files in configure.ac

2012-10-08 Thread Sujit Devkar
Dear Sir/Madam, I am working on autotools. I was using shell script to compile my c++ project. My shell script is g++ -I/usr/abc/inc -L/usr/abc/lib abc.cpp -lsrl -o abc works perfectly well. I need to use this in autoconf. Also I use .java files in the project and I use gcj --main=example

[RFC] pass #2 at getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 20:46 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: So, Debian is in the process of bringing up our upcoming arm64 port. Unfortunately we are also coming across lots of packages with rather outdated config.guess and config.sub files (see links below). I've taken on board advice received

Re: [RFC] pass #2 at getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Eric Blake
On 10/08/2012 09:27 PM, Paul Wise wrote: On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 20:46 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: So, Debian is in the process of bringing up our upcoming arm64 port. Unfortunately we are also coming across lots of packages with rather outdated config.guess and config.sub files (see links below).

Re: [RFC] pass #2 at getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 22:03 -0600, Eric Blake wrote: I still prefer the idea of being able to set an environment variable, $CONFIG_GUESS, rather than going hunting ourselves. Then, porting to a new config.guess script is a matter of calling: ./configure CONFIG_GUESS=/path/to/new/version

Re: [RFC] pass #2 at getting rid of the config.guess/sub problem when bootstrapping new ports/systems

2012-10-08 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 10/09/2012 05:27 AM, Paul Wise wrote: On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 20:46 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: So, Debian is in the process of bringing up our upcoming arm64 port. Unfortunately we are also coming across lots of packages with rather outdated config.guess and config.sub files (see links below).

Re: Autoconf example scripts for site defaults

2012-10-08 Thread Eric Blake
On 10/08/2012 03:50 AM, Harald Oehlmann wrote: In respect to page: http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.67/html_node/Site-Defaults.html#Site-Defaults the last example did not work for me: --/usr/local/share/config.site-- test $libdir = '${exec_prefix}/lib'