$(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE)

$(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE)

[Adolf Belka (ipfire)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 336 bytes --]

Hi all,


I saw a lot of lfs files having $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) added to them. This is presumably related to the recently upgraded automake package. Should I add $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) to any package I am updating if it has not already been added or is it only needed on the ones that have already been modified?


Regards,

Adolf.

Re: $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE)

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1432 bytes --]

Hey Adolf,

Great question, but the answer is no.

This is something that was required for the RISC-V port that I did and since the changes do not do anything on the other architectures, I merged the branch and was planning to write an announcement to the list.

Since I am quite buried in work at the moment, I didn’t not find to write the announcement, yet.

The macro simply updates the bundled automake scripts that come with the source tarballs of all those packages that use automake. They simply check whether the architecture the script is running on is supported and older versions report that they do not recognise this architecture at all. Therefore I simply replace them with a recent version from our version of automake and the build runs through.

Some more packages might need it, but we will see it when it happens. There probably won’t be too regular builds of RISC-V anyways, so there is nothing to worry about.

But good to ask this :)

-Michael

> On 8 Mar 2021, at 13:11, Adolf Belka (ipfire) <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I saw a lot of lfs files having $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) added to them. This is presumably related to the recently upgraded automake package. Should I add $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) to any package I am updating if it has not already been added or is it only needed on the ones that have already been modified?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Adolf.
> 

Re: $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE)

[Adolf Belka (ipfire)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1677 bytes --]

Hi Michael,

On 08/03/2021 16:02, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Hey Adolf,
> 
> Great question, but the answer is no.
Nice simple clear answer. Thanks very much.
> 
> This is something that was required for the RISC-V port that I did and since the changes do not do anything on the other architectures, I merged the branch and was planning to write an announcement to the list.
> 
> Since I am quite buried in work at the moment, I didn’t not find to write the announcement, yet.
> 
> The macro simply updates the bundled automake scripts that come with the source tarballs of all those packages that use automake. They simply check whether the architecture the script is running on is supported and older versions report that they do not recognise this architecture at all. Therefore I simply replace them with a recent version from our version of automake and the build runs through.
> 
> Some more packages might need it, but we will see it when it happens. There probably won’t be too regular builds of RISC-V anyways, so there is nothing to worry about.
Then I understand what was being done and won't worry about it any more.
> 
> But good to ask this :)
> 
> -Michael
> 
>> On 8 Mar 2021, at 13:11, Adolf Belka (ipfire) <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I saw a lot of lfs files having $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) added to them. This is presumably related to the recently upgraded automake package. Should I add $(UPDATE_AUTOMAKE) to any package I am updating if it has not already been added or is it only needed on the ones that have already been modified?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Adolf.
>>
> 

-- 
Sent from my laptop