[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by addr
From: |
Carl Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden) |
Date: |
Wed, 8 Jan 2020 20:15:05 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.10.191111 |
What documentation says AC_INIT should be called with constant arguments?
Quoting from
https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.67/html_node/Initializing-configure.html
"The arguments of AC_INIT must be static, i.e., there should not be any shell
computation, quotes, or newlines, but they can be computed by M4. This is
because the package information strings are expanded at M4 time into several
contexts, and must give the same text at shell time whether used in
single-quoted strings, double-quoted strings, quoted here-documents, or
unquoted here-documents. It is permissible to use m4_esyscmd or m4_esyscmd_s
for computing a version string that changes with every commit to a version
control system (in fact, Autoconf does just that, for all builds of the
development tree made between releases)."
This says to me that it is perfectly permissible to use m4_esyscmd to get a
version string. And having all our version information in one place and one
place only seems to be to be a good strategy.
Carl
On 1/8/20, 12:49 PM, "address@hidden" <address@hidden> wrote:
On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote:
> How about
> AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC'))
> The documentation says it is permissible to use m4_esyscmd as part of
the
> package information strings in AC_INIT.
> Carl
Not quite, but a variation seems to work. However I find this so ugly
that I'm not willing to pursue this direction. The documentation says
AC_INIT should be called with constant arguments, and we're again trying
to find ways around it :-(
https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/
- Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden),
Carl Sorensen <=
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/08
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/14
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/14
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/01/14
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), nine . fierce . ballads, 2020/01/14
- Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/01/14