Re: revision control info in generated files

[Peter Johansson]

Jef Driesen wrote:
> On 12/04/10 14:59, Peter Johansson wrote:
> > Also, I would try avoid distributing
> > `version.h', but not sure how to do that from top of my head.
>
> Why would you not distribute it?
Well, it's a matter of taste, but I see no real reason to include it in 
the tarball.

> I think it's very useful that it gets distributed. Imagine someone 
> downloads a tarball and wants to built it with the msvc compiler 
> (which I support for my project). Since no files can be generated in 
> that (non autotools) environment, that works fine *if* the generated 
> files are distributed.
Yeah, but you don't need autotools to generate `version.h'. You only 
need make, `version.h.in', and `version' of which the two latter are 
already included in the distribution, right?

> When I used to generate those files from configure.ac, they were 
> distributed as well.
Are you sure about that? Files in AC_CONFIG_FILES are typically not 
distributed but their "*.in" counterpart is. See, for example, how 
Makefile.in is distributed but the Makefile is generated at the end of 
configure.

Thanks,
Peter

--
Peter Johansson

svndigest maintainer, http://dev.thep.lu.se/svndigest
yat maintainer,       http://dev.thep.lu.se/yat