From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mcgrof@suse.com (Luis R. Rodriguez) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:24:40 +0100 Subject: [Cocci] Request 339055 commented by jengelh (submit devel:tools/coccinelle) In-Reply-To: <20151210151748.GD2253@pl-59055.rocqadm.inria.fr> References: <561ec27032c86_2e7132ba18787fc@build.opensuse.org> <20151014210450.GI14464@wotan.suse.de> <20151014212342.GK14464@wotan.suse.de> <562872D8.3060004@users.sourceforge.net> <20151022131829.GQ9528@wotan.suse.de> <20151210151748.GD2253@pl-59055.rocqadm.inria.fr> Message-ID: <20160119202440.GA11277@wotan.suse.de> To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 04:17:48PM +0100, S?bastien Hinderer wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for the delayed response. > > Luis R. Rodriguez (2015/10/22 15:18 +0200): > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:51:17AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday 2015-10-22 07:23, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > > > > > >> Since coccinelle.spec does not invoke autoreconf > > > > > > > >How does the script "https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/a46bef70162d17cec6b0fc6101d737989f735ee4/autogen" > > > >fit to your view? > > > > > > 1. Running `aclocal; autoconf` is not enough. I spot a Makefile.am > > > in the source tree, so you more or less need `autoreconf -fi` > > > instead in the "autogen" script. > > Well, the Makefile.am is indeed present but not actually used so are you > really sure the change you suggest is required? > > Is there any specific problem you are trying to solve with the current > code? Note: this was addressed to Markus. > > > 2. My point was that autogen / aclocal / autoconf / etc. > > > only needs to be run if there is no "configure" script present. > > > Because there is a configure script in the released tarballs > > > (at least there was so far), there is no need for coccinelle.spec to run > > > autogen. And if autogen/aclocal/autoconf/etc. is not run, we do not need to > > > BuildRequire it. > > > > The latest tarballs do not require it but the next releases will, so configure > > will not be carried, so this was more of a heads up note / pro-active > > patch. > > Well, so far my idea was to not provide configure in a public coccinelle > repository but to provide it in tarballs, following an approach which I > believe is common to many open-source projects, i.e. not > version-controlling any generated file but still distribute them in tarballs. Sounds good. Luis