Message-ID:	<20010209095004.9150.qmail@lauras.lt>
From:	"Laurynas Biveinis" <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
Date:	Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:50:04 +0200
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: djunpack.bat
Mail-Followup-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
References:	<20010208154453 DOT 263 DOT qmail AT lauras DOT lt> <CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIOEGDCAAA DOT tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.12i
In-Reply-To:	<CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDIOEGDCAAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>; from tim.van.holder@pandora.be on Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 10:01:21PM +0100
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 10:01:21PM +0100, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> Seems like exactly the right place for a Cygnus-tree based
> distribution. Should djunpack also work for a regular GNU
> package? If so, '%WHATHEVER%' or %WHATHEVER%/djgpp' might be
> better choices.

No, it shouldn't (at least there are no such strict requirements
for it). Cygnus tree is special - its top level is shared between
GCC, GDB, binutils, etc, etc. That's why djunpack.bat should be 
unified. For a non-Cygnus tree based GNU package it is OK to have
ad-hoc djunpack.bat.

> You could use a %WHATEVER%/djgpp dir with:
> 
> configure.in
> djunpack.in
> lfnchange.lst
> (Makefile.am - maybe)

Yup. There will be some dir for those files.

> djunpack.in can probably use something like @PACKAGE@-@VERSION@
> instead of WHATEVER (or configure.in could set up some
> 8.3-friendly version of it and AC_SUBST it).
> This would only require minor changes to the top-level makefile
> to get djunpack.bat from the subdir when building a distro.

Yes, it seems it's the way I'll go.

Laurynas

- Raw text -