Re: release schedule for 1.9? (Was: Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch))

2004-01-22 Thread Andrew Suffield
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 04:54:33PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: > > "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > adl> Also, since we have switched to API-numbering, bumping that > adl> version number has a cost. For instance Debian distributes > adl> automake1.4, automake1.6, aut

Re: release schedule for 1.9? (Was: Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch))

2004-01-22 Thread Tom Tromey
> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: adl> Also, since we have switched to API-numbering, bumping that adl> version number has a cost. For instance Debian distributes adl> automake1.4, automake1.6, automake1.7, and automake1.8. If we adl> add another API, it'd better be

release schedule for 1.9? (Was: Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch))

2004-01-20 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Thomas> I was wondering about the time frame for the next Thomas> release of automake. Our libgcj configury upgrade Thomas> depends on changes that are currently only available in Thomas> automake's CVS HEAD, so we anxiousl

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2004-01-15 Thread Thomas Fitzsimmons
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 16:39, Tom Tromey wrote: > > "Tom" == Thomas Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [ suggestions ] > > Tom> Anyway, this patch brings us closer to using automake-1.8 for libgcj. > Tom> Thanks! > > I think all the patches are in now. Could you try CVS automake an

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2004-01-03 Thread Thomas Fitzsimmons
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 16:39, Tom Tromey wrote: > > "Tom" == Thomas Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [ suggestions ] > > Tom> Anyway, this patch brings us closer to using automake-1.8 for libgcj. > Tom> Thanks! > > I think all the patches are in now. Could you try CVS automake an

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2004-01-02 Thread Tom Tromey
> "Tom" == Thomas Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ suggestions ] Tom> Anyway, this patch brings us closer to using automake-1.8 for libgcj. Tom> Thanks! I think all the patches are in now. Could you try CVS automake and see how big the resulting Makefile.in is? Tom

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2003-12-30 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Thomas> The size could still be reduced further though. I Thomas> discussed the following with Tom on IRC: Thomas> - all libgcj objects are listed in Thomas> am__libgcj_la_SOURCES_DIST which is included in Thomas> DIST_SO

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2003-12-30 Thread Thomas Fitzsimmons
On Sat, 2003-12-27 at 21:25, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > >>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > adl> 1999-11-22 Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > adl> > adl> * automake.in (handle_single_transform_list): Generate explicit > adl> rule for s

Re: automake -vs- huge projects (1st patch)

2003-12-27 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] adl> 1999-11-22 Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> adl> adl> * automake.in (handle_single_transform_list): Generate explicit adl> rule for subdir objects. Fixes new addition to subobj.test. [...] adl> The othe