Brian Jones wrote:
> > The problem with Option 2 is that it requires that the user have JavaDeps
> > installed in order to build because the maintainer build options rebuilds
> > the .deps file, which is something few people will want to do.
>
> Does it require this? The reason I say this is because the user
> wouldn't have a target to be made in /lib at all in the distribution.
> Only if the user configured the maintainer version would it require it
> and then we're prefectly within our rights to require anything we want
> to make the build work according to the GNU coding documentation.
What I'm saying is that if the person does an --enable-maintainer-build in
order to create the target in lib that rebuilds the classes (perhaps because
he wants to recompile the classes to fix a bug), then he needs JavaDeps
because enable-maintainer tries to rebuild the .deps file. We need to be
able to compile the classes without rebuilding the .deps file IMO.
> > Maybe we could have a configure option that would simply skip the lib
> > directory build if the user doesn't want to rebuild the Java classes. This
> > could be on or off by default, depending on what we like. Of course we have
> > to make sure the lib directory gets included in the "install" target.
>
> I think my 'version' of number 1. does this without the 'hackery'
> you're talking about. If you want, I'll try to make the changes which
> make 1. work and check those in.
Check in whatever you like. I'll give it a try when you're done.
BTW: Were you able to build and get things running with what is in there
now? Did you try a make dist and a build from the distribution file that
creates? We should probably make sure that things are working for someone
besides me first before we try to perfect the process.
--
Aaron M. Renn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/
