> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 22:26:17 -0500 > From: Gaetan Nadon <[email protected]> > > On 14-02-17 05:42 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Ugh, please no. Can't we just stick to automake 1.x? > > We can't stop people from using whatever comes with their distro. With > automake 2.0, it will break and will submit patches to fix it.
Well, given the many incompatible changes, I'm sure distros will continue to provide automake 1.x in some form for the foreseeable future. > > >From a practical point of view, some of us import Xorg into other > > version control systems that don't properly support symlinks. > > This is interesting. Does the imported X code include Mesa Graphics > Library? It already contains links. Examples: > > ./mesa/mesa/src/gallium/state_trackers/dri/drm/dri_drawable.c > ./mesa/mesa/src/mesa/drivers/dri/r200/radeon_span.c Not sure when those links were introduced. We have Mesa 9.2.5 on OpenBSD, but the build process is heavily custumized because the Mesa build doesn't fit in with how we build Xorg on OpenBSD. But I see some evidence that these links are one of the reason why we have this custom build process. This makes it a serious effort for us to deal with Mesa updates. Please don't force us to do the same thing for the xserver. > I don't know how the X code is imported in the VCS, it is possible that > you get real files instead of links (the tarball does not contain > links). Can you apply the first patch and see what happens? Getting real files is even worse. That way you have multiple copies of the same files and need to keep them in sync. _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
