[Gc] libatomic_ops: time to alpha release?
hans.boehm at hp.com
Thu Oct 15 10:57:16 PDT 2009
> From: Petter Urkedal
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 10:38 AM
> To: gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> Subject: Re: [Gc] libatomic_ops: time to alpha release?
> On 2009-10-15, Boehm, Hans wrote:
> > > From: Petter Urkedal
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 9:39 AM
> > >
> > > I don't think we need to commit the files under m4 to the repo,
> > > since they are not used by configure. The only benefit I
> can see of
> > > committing them is for someone who has all Autotools
> except Libtool.
> > > So, to minimise the number of generated files in the repo, my
> > > suggestion is to cvsignore them instead.
> > It sounds like I misunderstood something here. These files
> are used only by autoconf to generate configure? They are
> not needed by libtool itself in order to drive the
> compilation? If so, I agree that it seems better not to
> check them in, though I think we do need the empty directory
> in the repository and the tar-ball? Otherwise the
> reconfiguration process seemed to fail.
> That's right. The contents of the required m4 files,
> including acinclude.m4, gets copied into aclocal.m4, except
> it seems than those which reside in the m4 dir may be
> included. I hadn't notice the includes before. Then
> Autoconf uses aclocal.m4 when to instantiate the macros from
> configure.ac into configure. On the other hand, the
> build-aux files (compile, config.sub, config.guess, ...) are required.
> Note also that when leaving out the other m4 files, it does
> not make sense to keep aclocal.m4 in the repository either
> due to the includes.
That sounds like a plan.
I don't see the warning that Ivan complained about either, so I suspect that with these changes, and the libatomic_ops version changes, we should be largely OK.
More information about the Gc