Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <3C2D1B20.5010907@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:23:44 -0500 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Collins CC: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: libtool devel works nicely References: <018a01c18fa9$267ebe50$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Collins wrote: > Chuck, > lovely wrapper scripts, they work beautifully (its what I used for > libxml2 and libxslt - which I did so I could give you feedback). That's good to hear. So you exercised the whole automake/autoconf/libtool chain? If so, then how did you put together your -src package for libx*? (I ask merely because I'm curious: if you re-auto* a given source package, then there are LOTS of changes and your diff is very big. Alternatively, you can make minimum changes to high-level files like configure.in and Makefile.am -- resulting in a small diff -- and have your build script re-bootstrap during the 'prep' phase...but that complicates the 'mkpatch' phase. This latter approach is a real PITA -- but it's the only way to reliably generate a small patch that can be submitted to the upstream maintainers. NOT that they would accept such a patch if it's generated by a non-regulation libtool or when they're not ready to move "up" to the most recent autoconf/automake...sigh) --Chuck