Quoting Sam Halliday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from ml.softs.gtk-gnutella.devel:
:was `autoreconf' not designed to do all this for you? adding an extra source
:file to the procedure with the GNU auto tools is trivial... it should just be
:one extra entry in a Makefile.in file. i really don't see what gtk
>
> i daren't even try compiling on a SUN or FreeBSD machine... or even attempt NLS!
It actually compiles fine on FreeBSD i386 & alpha.
> well, despite the fact that i think this is a very silly thing to do... it is
> done and we must all live with it now. it would be very helpful, and it could
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> auto* killed itself on gtk-gnutella. It left us with an uncompilable
> gtk-gnutella source tree when we wanted to create a release.
well, yous must have been doing something wrong... its used in much larger
projects like glibc, gcc, mozilla and emacs: i dont see how gtk-
ARGH!
> err, i just (tried) upgrading from gtk-gnutella-0.92.1c to 0.92.1, and the
> compile system has just gone completely mad!! what is going on? did
> someone
> decide the standard GNU configure/make/install method was too standards
> compliant and want to change it? this has completely destro
Sam Halliday said:
> but i just dont know why anyone
> would want to remove the GNU autoconf method when it is such an elegant
> and, lets face it, standard way of compiling code on almost any
> architecture out there!
Well elegant is a bit of a debatable point. If you search through the
mailing
err, i just (tried) upgrading from gtk-gnutella-0.92.1c to 0.92.1, and the
compile system has just gone completely mad!! what is going on? did someone
decide the standard GNU configure/make/install method was too standards
compliant and want to change it? this has completely destroyed the ability t
