On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Peter W. Draper wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Tim Jenness wrote:
>
>> On Apr 7, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Peter W. Draper wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Tim Jenness wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Peter W. Draper wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > David,
>> > > > can you revisit: 849d270cad, cnf: Do not include old cnf.h file in
>> > > > "make dist" tar file? That change means that "cnf.h" is no longer
>> > > > installed and is breaking a lot of old code.
>> > >
>> > > I didn't even realise that people were using the make dist targets,
>> > > let alone using recent git builds to generate them. I'm impressed.
>> > >
>> > > Shouldn't make install create a soft link though? Or do the copy from
>> > > f77.h to cnf.h? No reason to have both in the tar ball.
>> >
>> > Yes, if I was doing that job I'd add an installation hook for creating a
>> > softlink from f77.h to cnf.h. Since DSB is relaxing somewhere, I've
>> > committed a fix.
>> >
>>
>> Thanks, but can you comment on the myriad make dist users?
>
> Who me, not really. The only time I use the dist targets is when building
> from source on an odd system (like JNIAST under mingw), where I don't want
> everything. I thought David just kept the AST dist target working for source
> releases, so why CNF, I've no idea.
Ok. I got confused by the "is breaking old code" which implied to me that
there were people building old code with the current system and would
actually notice David's breakage immediately.
I'd be surprised if anyone was using the dist targets apart from AST.
(although we should be doing that to allow something like gentoo to work).
Does anyone remember why f77.h is the preferred option and cnf.h
deprecated? I'd expect it to be the other way round (since cnf.h has a
more obvious provenance).
We shouldn't be using both in the starlink tree though so it looks like I
have to fix: ndg, gwm, hds, kaplibs, idi, nbs, psx, pcs, img, figaro,
gaia, hdstools, ccdpack, icl, startcl, convert and then we can deprecate
cnf.h for the next release and remove it completely after that. Shouldn't
be too difficult.
I've been toying with the idea of deprecating NBS for the next release and
then moving it to obsolete after that (and removing it from startcl and
icl). No-one can be using it much since it is broken on 64-bit.
--
Tim Jenness
JAC software
http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/~timj
|