[pacman-dev] [PATCH 0/5] Use more auto in autotools

[Dave Reisner]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 10:40:14PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 05/07/13 14:47, Allan McRae wrote:
> > On 26/06/13 15:01, Allan McRae wrote:
> >> The use of autotools in pacman is interesting...  We commit most autotools
> >> generated files, but not configure or Makefile.  One reason for this is that
> >> we needed to patch ltmain.sh to properly handle -Wl,-as-needed, because
> >> the Arch package maintainer refused to do so unless upstream accepts!
> >> Libtool upstream have known about the bug since at least 2006, so that does
> >> not look hopeful.
> >>
> >> The new approach is to have autogen.sh call autoreconf and then have it
> >> patch the ltmain.sh file.  This removes a lot of crap that should be
> >> autogenerated from our git repo:
> >>  38 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 28256 deletions(-)
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > Has anyone already got a VM that could do some more testing of this for
> > me?   Perhaps with a VM that does not have gpgme?  Maybe curl too?
> 
> I have tested this out.
> 
> The two situations I tested:
> 1) No curl
> 2) No gpgme
> 
> #1 worked as expected.  With #2, autoreconf does not copy (the
> non-existent) gpgme.m4 file with really nonsensical errors:
> 
> configure.ac:178: error: possibly undefined macro: AS_IF
> (and other similar)
> 
> So unless anyone has any idea, it looks like we still need to include
> gpgme.m4 in our git.

This is fine. You can't rely on target build systems having the .m4
files you need for defining the tests, which is why using pkg-config is
always a better option, if available (one .m4 to rule them all).

> 
> I have also added a "-N" to the patch line so running ./autogen.sh
> multiple times does not case errors.
> 
> Allan
> 
> 
>