On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:59:18 +1000 David Seikel <onef...@gmail.com> said:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:06:13 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) > <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:37:45 +1030 Simon Lees <si...@simotek.net> > > said: > > > > > Hi all, > > > Today i noticed the Automake requirements have changed and i was > > > wondering if this requrement change was due to functionality or > > > just because it is what people are testing? The reason i ask is 1 > > > because at work i am running Ubuntu 10.10 and i am not likely to > > > upgrade anytime soon, untill now i have had no problems building > > > and running the latest versions of e17 however it only has automake > > > 1.10.2 I am guessing there are a few other Ubnutu 10.04 (Still in > > > support) and debian people are stuck with a older version. Also our > > > SLES build on OBS only has 1.10.1. I could sit down and figure out > > > why automake doesn't work and try and come up with patches but i am > > > guessing someone on this list can tell me why and there are > > > probably more useful things i could be getting running. > > > > probably is part of automake complaining things are deprecated and us > > adapting... as such if u are a developer - u can upgrade yur > > automake. if you are just building efl (packages) you never need > > automake - ever. or autoconf. you use the tarballs released :) > > Not everyone can "just upgrade automake". There's entirely valid > reasons for people to stick with old yet still supported operating > systems, and entirely valid reasons to not piecemeal upgrade parts of > it. Especially if you are a developer, you might have even more > reasons to stick with old but still supported operating systems that > are as close to stock as you can keep them. Notice Simon's "i am not > likely to upgrade anytime soon", he has an entirely valid reason for > that I'm sure. So while I'm sure Simon has the skill to upgrade his > automake, he might not have any desire to do so. Not to mention the > other people using the other Linux distros he mentions. the JOB of this project is to PRODUCE RELEASES. that is the OUTPUT. RELEASES are TARBALLS with no need for autofoo for the consumers of these releases. unless simon has a need to modify the Makefile.ams or configure.ac's he doesn't need autotools at all. he can debug code, patch it, send patches, package it and do the vast majority of things needed with it without any autofoo. *IF* this is needed, then a newer automake is needed. as a developer (person modifying the build setup itself) he is perfectly capable of doing this. if he CHOOSES not to then ... that's life - you don't get to modify it. it's a choice. > Simon even mentioned that it's his work system that has this problem. > It's very likely that some company provided systems are locked down to > specific versions of development tools for the companies own reasons. > Say for instance to provide a common development environment for all the > developers. He might not be allowed to upgrade automake. you dont need to be root to upgrade it. don't be silly. if you're a developer you can happily upgrade automake all you like - as long as whatever you want to upgrade doesn't need root privs (setuid root for example), you can do it. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
