[Python-Dev] DRAFT: python-dev Summary for 2006-01-01 through 2006-01-15 (original) (raw)

Ronald Oussoren ronaldoussoren at mac.com
Fri Jan 27 18:04:03 CET 2006

On 27-jan-2006, at 17:14, Thomas Heller wrote:

John J Lee <jjl at pobox.com> writes:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Thomas Heller wrote: [...] As I said in the other thread (where the discussion should probably be continued anyway):

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-January/060113.html only aclocal.m4 isn't clear to me about the license. Anyway, it could be that this file isn't needed after all - I don't know enough about the GNU toolchain to be sure. Can anyone comment on this? From 'info autoconf': | The Autoconf macros are defined in several files. Some of the files | are distributed with Autoconf; autoconf' reads them first._ _Then it_ _| looks for the optional file acsite.m4' in the directory that contains | the distributed Autoconf macro files, and for the optional file | `aclocal.m4' in the current directory. Those files can contain your | site's or the package's own Autoconf macro definitions (*note Writing [...] So, I assume aclocal.m4 is under the same license as the rest of the libffi you're using. I cannot uinderstand your reasoning. How can 'info autoconf' incluence the license of the aclocal.m4 file? Or do I misunderstand something? Given that all kind of *nix experts are here on this list - can someone tell if aclocal.m4 is needed for building libffi at all or not?

aclocal.m4 is needed to build configure, it's a library of configure
fragments.

I try to stay away from configure as far as possible so cannot say if
those fragments are really needed.

Ronald

-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2157 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060127/73605721/attachment-0001.bin

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list