On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:04:49 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>Can't we have a prebuilt ./configure in the repository?
This is generally considered to be a Bad Idea, since configure is
autogenerated code and it's easy to forget to update it before checking
in changes (and it wastes space). The genera
On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:04:49 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
> >Can't we have a prebuilt ./configure in the repository?
>
> This is generally considered to be a Bad Idea, since configure is
> autogenerated code and it's easy to forget to update it b
On Tue, 8 Jun 1999, Holger Waechtler wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:04:49 -0700, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> >
> > >Can't we have a prebuilt ./configure in the repository?
> >
> > This is generally considered to be a Bad Idea, since configure
On 08-Jun-99 Holger Waechtler wrote:
> A prebuilt script is a good idea, - at this time I can't create it on my
> own, since my autoconf is too old.
Upgrade! You're a developer.
> It should be no problem to run a script on the CVS-Server at every
> checkin, which generates a new configure fil
Holger Waechtler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
> >
> > I think a better approach would be to compile everything
> > we are capable of & do the checks at runtime.
>
> That's exactly the thing I want to do. The linux-3dnow target is currently
> the one which
On 07-Jun-99 Keith Whitwell wrote:
>> (And if the autoconf stuff works, we won't need these targets anymore - )
> This sounds like it is done,
Yep.
> perhaps we should disable the old methods
> on the experimental branch for the same reasons - get people using
> autoconf by default so we can s
Thomas Tanner wrote:
>
> On 07-Jun-99 Keith Whitwell wrote:
> >> (And if the autoconf stuff works, we won't need these targets anymore - )
> > This sounds like it is done,
>
> Yep.
>
> > perhaps we should disable the old methods
> > on the experimental branch for the same reasons - get people