[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: missing --run/not run

From: Norman Gray
Subject: Re: missing --run/not run
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:32:47 +0100


On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:39:09 +0100, Paul Brook wrote:

>> We as a project have decided to go the route of checking
>> autotool-generated files into our CVS repository, and as a result are
>> discovering the full subtleties of the consequences of that, in
>I suffered similar problems until I discovered AM_MAINTAINER_MODE

Thanks for this. I'd seen AM_MAINTAINER_MODE (sorry, I should have mentioned that), but ended up persuaded by the largely negative discussion of it in the FAQ section of the automake manual. It sounds as if it adds a new dimension of version-skew problems (``Well, it works for me! What mode are you in? For that matter, what mode am _I_ in?''), and we have enough of those to be going on with. Have you had this sort of problem in practice?

I'm sure there are circumstances where it could be an excellent solution. However in our particular (distributed) group, I feel that maintainer mode would probably cause more debugging hassles and confusions than it would avoid.

I note that the last sentence of that particular FAQ section ends ``...and because `missing' isn't enough if you have the wrong version of the tools.'' On the contrary, I think `missing' can be made to be enough (if I'm not missing some problem (ho ho)).

All the best,


Norman Gray         
Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow    address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]