[rtems commit] New.
ralf.corsepius at rtems.org
Fri Jul 27 10:06:31 UTC 2012
On 07/27/2012 05:41 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 07/27/2012 11:33 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> How many people around here are sufficiently with the autotools to make a
>> fundated statement? I am not aware of any.
In case you are not aware about it: I am heavily using them for more
than 15 years.
> Yes, this is one of the problems with the autotools.
Well, what shall I say?
The autotools are one amongst many tools RTEMS is using.
As with any other tool, when working with them
- users cannot avoid making yourself at least to some extend familiar
- maintainers cannot avoid following upstreams development and to adjust
works to upstream development, sometimes dropping backward compatiblity.
That said, if I wasn't convinced about this step being an improvement, I
would not have applied it.
But, I am tired of
* (newcomer) users permanently complaining about "bootstrap" and having
issues with it.
* developers facing "sporactic problems", which occasionally show to be
using wrong versions of the autotools.
I am glad this step already has helped identifying issues with RTEMS
1. The bspopts.h.in issue you mentioned (I can reproduce it, but it is
2. The sequence "bootstrap -c; bootstrap" has been broken until earlier
3. More smaller issues.
Finally, this step has made it possible to switch between
rtems-4.10-branch and master in git head, without major issues.
Also, consider that, provided you have the correct versions of the
autotools in $PATH, nothing much has changed about the work-flow.
Building with "--enable-maintainer-mode" works as before :-)
More information about the devel