[Gc] Maintainers attention: libatomic_ops
matthias.andree at gmx.de
Wed Sep 30 06:36:13 PDT 2009
Am 30.09.2009, 14:29 Uhr, schrieb Henning Makholm <makholm at octoshape.com>:
> The trouble with that is that you'll never know if it works unless
> you're sure
> that the contributor who creates and tests a patch for a particular
> (which other developers may not be able to test) is using the same
> versions to generate autofoo files as will be used to produce the final
> in the end.
I have yet to see real-world issues of this that aren't caused by misuse
of the auto* stuff such as incomplete autogen.sh scripts or use of
autoconf 2.13 compatibility cruft with 2.50+ versions (which have been
around for nearly a decade now).
> Given the traditional lack of cross-version robustness of the autotools
> there would be a large risk that contributors submitted code that worked
> their version of the autotools, but (unknown to anyone) happened to fail
> on the
> version Hans uses to create the distribution tarball.
The traditional lack of cross-version robustness would likely apply to
autoconf before 2.50 and automake 1.5, or perhaps 1.6, and also usually
refer to incomplete or misordered rebuilds of the auto* stuff, and usually
also be fixed through autoreconf -ivf (add -s if you like).
I cannot vouch for libtool, but auto* is quite sane, and has been for half
> The code tested for each platform should be same code that eventually
"Code tested" would be GC code, not the build surroundings that you throw
away after installation, and auto* shouldn't influence that.
More information about the Gc