Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-15 Thread Jim DeLaHunt
Hi, folks: [resend, sent to old domain name at first, sorry] I am working on a port[1], where I want to patch a couple of autoconf macros[2] and configure.ac . The unpatched macros give -Wimplicit-function-declaration errors, but they are easy to fix via patches.  However, I discovered that th

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-15 Thread Joshua Root
On 2022-2-15 19:28 , Jim DeLaHunt wrote: I am working on a port[1], where I want to patch a couple of autoconf macros[2] and configure.ac . The unpatched macros give -Wimplicit-function-declaration errors, but they are easy to fix via patches.  However, I discovered that the ./configure script

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-16 Thread Jim DeLaHunt
On 2022-02-15 01:08, Joshua Root wrote: On 2022-2-15 19:28 , Jim DeLaHunt wrote: I am working on a port[1], where I want to patch a couple of autoconf macros[2] and configure.ac The codebase supplies a script, ./autogen.sh . It runs autoconf, libtool, etc. etc. and regenerates the ./confi

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-16 Thread Jason Liu
autogen.sh is quite often just a wrapper around autoreconf -i. If you run 'autoreconf --install' (which is what 'use_autoreconf yes' runs), in many/most cases it's equivalent to running autogen.sh. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50044091/what-is-the-job-of-autogen-sh-when-building-a-c-package

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-17 Thread Jim DeLaHunt
On 2022-02-16 23:12, Jason Liu wrote: autogen.sh is quite often just a wrapper around autoreconf -i. If you run 'autoreconf --install' (which is what 'use_autoreconf yes' runs), in many/most cases it's equivalent to running autogen.sh.

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-21 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Feb 17, 2022, at 14:10, Jim DeLaHunt wrote: > > On 2022-02-16 23:12, Jason Liu wrote: >> autogen.sh is quite often just a wrapper around autoreconf -i. If you run >> 'autoreconf --install' (which is what 'use_autoreconf yes' runs), in >> many/most cases it's equivalent to running autogen.sh.

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-21 Thread Jim DeLaHunt
On 2022-02-21 07:59, Ryan Schmidt wrote: ...[earlier thread elided]... It is very common for projects to offer an autogen.sh script[very helpful commentary elided]... Thank you for taking the time to write this out, Ryan. It is now on the mail archive. I might collect it into a wiki page

Re: Patch ./configure, or use autogen.sh instead?

2022-02-21 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Feb 21, 2022, at 16:32, Jim DeLaHunt wrote: > But I also thought, why not also patch the m4 macros which generate the > configure script? It keeps the codebase on the user's machine consistent. It > keeps the patches in the MacPorts repository. What harm could it do? > > I'm glad you aske