"Anthony J. Bentley" <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Nigel,
Hi folks, > You've convinced me that this probably shouldn't go into the tree. > > Nigel Taylor writes: >> If you look in git repositories like github, the tar ball created >> automatically is not the same as the tar ball distributed, they have >> some process for creating the distribution tar ball and including just >> those autoconf archive macros required, so doing a git clone of github >> project, and building within the clone you might need the autoconf >> archive, this is not about building ports. > > Unfortunately, this is a common problem on Github: they tend *not* to > provide dist tarballs, and they don't keep generated configure scripts > in Git. So you have no choice but to fetch the autogenerated "tarballs" > of the source using GH_*, and run autoconf yourself. Yet another example > of bad upstream behavior that we have to push against to keep our > sanity... This doesn't prevent the inclusion of such a port. Having this archive at hand could be useful for reference, instead of having to browse the website. Hence why I proposed to install the macros in a directory not searched by default by autotools. I'll admit that this usefulness is limited; your call. :) -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
