[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bootstrap vs. autogen.sh
From: |
krthie |
Subject: |
Re: bootstrap vs. autogen.sh |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:35:22 -0700 (PDT) |
John W. Eaton wrote
> OK, I have no problem with renaming autogen.sh to bootstrap.
I so happened to "hg update" today and noticed this, while
http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/doc/interpreter/Building-the-Development-Sources.html
still mentions autogen.sh. Of course, this change is brand new, but I
thought I'd mention it such that this doesn't get forgotten.
By the way, should the mercurial repo contain a file telling the developer
to use ./bootstrap etc?
thanks
Kris
--
View this message in context:
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/bootstrap-vs-autogen-sh-tp4644116p4644438.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.