On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 17:50 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Gaetan Nadon <[email protected]> (05/01/2012): > > > #!/bin/sh > > > exec xorg-autogen.sh "$@" > > > > Note that I will also have to update configure.ac in each module to > > mandate the latest version of xorg-macros (as usual): > > XORG_MACROS_VERSION(1.17) > > So you'll have a check in configure.ac to make sure xorg-macros has > xorg-autogen.sh, so that autogen.sh can run it? autogen.sh is what > triggers autoreconf and the look at configure.ac; chicken, egg.
Hmm...but how many people 1) Build an xorg module from git 2) Are patching a configure.ac or Makefile.am and thus want to rerun autotools in a package built from tarball but can't ALSO trivially update xorg-util-macros? I'm not too familiar with the workflow of people who hack on X.org related modules, so it's an honest question. In GNOME we recommend jhbuild which makes it trivial to pull in the latest gnome-common git. But of course we made a common autogen script years ago, so that module is pretty widespread; e.g. you can install it via major distribution packages too. Regardless we could certainly change the patch to all modules to be: #!/bin/sh common_autogen=`which xorg-util-autogen.sh 2>/dev/null` if test -n "$common_autogen"; then exec $common_autogen "$@" else # copy&pasted version here fi One question someone watching this discussion might be wondering - why keep an autogen.sh in each module at all? There are a few reasons, but an example one is that it allows a module to individually check for say a buggy automake version that some of its Makefile.am code triggers, and bail, but still then exec the common autogen.sh. _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
