Re: gEDA-dev: What should be included in the dist file?

[Dan McMahill <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Stuart Brorson wrote:
> Al --
>
> Sorry for my late response.  Answering you was on my ToDo list, but
> somehow went down a rathole.


> 0.0  Tex, Latex, or texi files if you already have them.  Why not
> distribute them?  Just don't make the build dependent upon having the
> build tools.  Build them only when --enable-maintainer-mode is set
> during configure.

or only build them when they are out of date and if they are included in 
the distfile and only removed with a 'make maintainer-clean', then the 
same effect can be achieved.

> > 2. DVI files?
>
>
> Why?  This is generated from .tex, and is only used to generate ps and
> pdf.  At one time you sent this file to a printer, but that was back
> when I was a grad student, i.e. a loooooong time ago, when dinosaurs
> roamed the earth.
>
> It's just an intermediate file format, generated on the way from .tex
> to .pdf.  Therefore, I think you should not distribute dvi.

other than distributing it keeps the dependency chain intact.  Also it 
means if a user wants to modify the manual, s/he doesn't need to do 
anything special (other than have latex and friends installed) for it to 
"just work".



> *  For users, you should assume they don't have most tools, and the
> source distribution tarballs should require only basic compilation
> tools like gcc, make and all that.   Moreover, you should obey the
> KISS principle for user distributions when thinking about what to
> include, what to build, etc.
>
> Of course, the reductio-ad-absurdium of my argument is that users
> should just download .rpms or whatever.  And I do agree that if .rpm
> (or whatever) was truly a cross-distro/cross-platform compatible
> format, then it should be all that one should need.  Unfortunately,
> it's not, so source tarballs remain as the one true cross-platform
> method to distribute unix software.

Indeed.  Since gnucap really has nearly no dependencies it is a snap to 
build on a minimal solaris system where rpm's mean nothing.

Despite the warts that autoconf/automake have, I really think they make 
life easier for the end user provided some care went in to the setup 
especially with regards to the docs.

Part of why I put together the autoconf/automake system for gnucap is I 
was tired of dealing with the old system while maintaining the NetBSD 
package.

-Dan



_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev