[tex-live] Build of Oct 2,
22:45 source.development fails onMacOS X
fabrice.popineau at supelec.fr
Sun Oct 3 20:43:25 CEST 2004
> I suspect you underestimate the amount of work required.
Possibly. My point is that for most people, it would be easier to fix a
regular (simple) Makefile (if needed) than this autoconf problem.
> Certainly my
> experience with packages that use this form of configuration is not
> that good: the config file for the host the developer uses is often
> the only one that's actually correct and up-to-date.
The problem is when you try to put together a platform like texlive which is
built out of several independently maintained packages: there are few
chances the developers do use the same version of auto* stuff than you are.
Without speaking of those packages than can compile with or without kpathsea
> Some of this may be due to using different versions of autoconf, I
> think. Can you give some concrete examples?
I think I was refereeing to HAVE_DECL_GETENV (GNU grep, doffutils) vs
HAVE_GETENV_H. I must say I haven't look into it, was merely afraid by the
profusion of symbols refereeing to the same function and some new direction
But anyway, my point was: who ensures the stability of this set of features?
More information about the tex-live