Subject: Re: CVS commit: gnusrc/gnu/dist/autoconf
To: Todd Vierling <>
From: Jim Wise <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 11/14/2001 15:33:44
Hash: SHA1

I guess my main question is:  what are we optimizing for here?  A small
amount of disk space?

It's not an issue on cvs updates more than once per version imported.
It's a few k of disk space, and it's a divergence between the dist dir
and the imported distribution.  What does it buy us?

On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Todd Vierling wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Jim Wise wrote:
>: Is this really the right thing to do?
>: I've often been concerned that a.) removing large numbers of files from
>: dist/ dubdirectories makes for a bunch of extra work when importing the
>: next version of a package, and that b.) doing so makes for very odd cvs
>: histories if we decide we do want to use those files later -- suppose
>: that we add a flag to autoconf, and want to update the .info
>: documentation -- will we re-add the .texi files at that date?
>This is in the interest of keeping the in-tree copy of autoconf at a minimum
>level.  It is not built by default, and will be used to generate exactly one
>file by toolchain maintainers:  src/tools/compat/configure.
>If we feel at some point in the future that this copy of autoconf will have
>an expanded role (and I hope not, actually), the .texi files can be re-added

- -- 
				Jim Wise
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (NetBSD)
Comment: For info see