On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:11:50 +1030 Simon <si...@simotek.net> said:

> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:00:28 +1000 From: David Seikel 
> <onef...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [E-devel] Automake 1.11 To: 
> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: 
> <20121115200028.339b23c0.onef...@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; 
> charset="us-ascii" On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:53:06 +0900 Carsten Haitzler 
> (The Rasterman) <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:59:18 +1000 David Seikel <onef...@gmail.com>
> >> said:
> >>
> >>> 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.
> > I did not mention root.  Could be "locked down" based on the boss
> > saying "Thou shalt use version X, and only version X, on pain of being
> > fired.".
> >
> We'll im glad to see i have generated some lively discussion, Lucas told 
> me what i needed to know which is why automake is required so tomorrow i 
> will install it in the home directory of my local user. The reason i 
> don't upgrade is our development environment is interesting and old to 
> say the least, for version control we use some web forms based on a 
> bunch of scripts based on teamware and sccs running on a solaris server. 
> Upgrading past Ubuntu 10.10 seems to break this setup, in short i don't 
> know how most of our systems work, i don't want to know how they work 
> and i figure the less i touch and change things the less likely they are 
> to break. I do also know i have network drives mapped to some common 
> install paths for build tools and that is more likely to break things.
> So if i didn't need to i was happy not to upgrade. I guess we will also 
> make a automake package for SLES at the right version.
> In all honesty if i was in Rasters position i would have just said you 
> need to upgrade so i know where your coming from.

that's kind of the position - if you are a DEVELOPER.. upgrade. move with the
times for TOOLS. HOW.. you do this.. is a matter for you - given what you say,
you have a "fragile" os environment to support other stuff for work, then its
easy to put any upgraded stuff in ~/mystuff or whatever and make them preferred
with $PATH and $LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc. when and if required (have a small shells
script your source that does this). then they only impact your shell env etc.
once you configure it - otherwise they are just some disk space cruft in ~/ :)
assuming you use efl and e.. you have enough cruft there, so this isn't a
problem.

-- 
------------- 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

Reply via email to