Re: libgetopt++ and setup and libstdc++

[Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd at yahoo dot com>]

Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:earnie_boyd@yahoo.com]
> 
> > > *** IMPORTANT ***
> > > libgetopt++ does not store the autotool created files in CVS. You'll
> > > need to run ./bootstrap.sh in it's source dir to create them.
> > > *****************
> > >
> >
> > That's goes against the FSF standard and the recommendations
> > of the autotools groups themselves.  You shouldn't require
> > the user to have the autotools installed.  That's the reason
> > every package always has all of the needed files for
> > configure to execute.
> 
> Perhaps I wasn't clear. This is only for CVS. Distributions and -src
> packages will naturally have the autotool generated files included.
> 
> However, CVS is _not_ a distribution, and anyone developing from CVS
> will require the autotool suite if they make any non-trivial changes.
> 

A source distribution is a source distribution regardless of how the
source is distributed.  Cvs is a viable source distribution medium even
though it's purpose is to aid developers in development.

> That's part of why AM_MAINTAINER_MODE exists, and what 'make dist-all'
> is for.
> 
> If I was clear, and you still think CVS should have those files...
> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_43.html#SEC43
> paragraph 4. The bootstrap recipe is what I follow, and it's been very
> reliable and easy to use on several projects.
> 

I'll have to take a look.  But, yes I would still argue that cvs is a
viable means to distribute source.

Earnie.