pmaydell@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Jon Steinhart wrote:
But the patched tarball has problems building on machines that do not
have GNU m4 installed.
OK, so it sounds like I should wait on a release until this gets resolved.
Feh. I'll have a look at this. (I've also realised that I have access
to the sourceforge compile farm, so I'll have a go at testing that we
can compile OK on some other platforms too).
OK, I've done some testing and the results are:
Successful compile:
Linux/x86 Debian stable (sarge)
Linux/x86 Fedora FC2
Solaris/SPARC
Linux/AMD64
NetBSD
(I didn't actually test the binaries, just that they could be built.)
Failure:
OpenBSD/x86: I tried the sourceforge compile farm OpenBSD box, and it
built OK except that it screwed up on the makefile in the man/ directory
by trying to build manpages before man.sed (despite the dependency rule
directing otherwise). It's not a simple GNU-makeism (because NetBSD works
fine). So I propose to ignore this as a bug in that make unless somebody
submits a patch and rationale.
I think the problems Igor was having are because the makefile rules for
rerunning autoconf were kicking in (perhaps a clock skew problem between
the machine he ran autoconf on and the one he ran make on?). Anyway, GNU
autoconf requires GNU m4 (no avoiding that) but a proper release tarball
including a configure script should have no problems.
So I think we could go ahead and roll out a point release.
-- PMM
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers