-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Aloha!
Cloned nettle and noticed that INSTALL states:
"Briefly, the shell commands `./configure; make; make install' should configure, build, and install this package."
But at least in the repo there is only a config.ac and you need to run the .bootstrap shell script in order to invoke autoconf and autoheaders in order to get the configure script.
Shouldn't INSTALL mention this?
- -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours
Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning. ======================================================================== Joachim Strömbergson Secworks AB joachim@secworks.se ========================================================================
Joachim Strömbergson joachim@secworks.se writes:
Shouldn't INSTALL mention this?
INSTALL is the generic GNU installation instructions, and intended for the user who has downloaded a release tarball. I'd prefer to not add any nettle-specific info there.
The README file mentions building from git and refers to http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/nettle/ for instructions. That page says "After checkout, you need to run the .bootstrap script before the standard ./configure && make.". Maybe that could be made clearer in some way?
Regards, /Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Aloha!
Niels Möller wrote:
Joachim Strömbergson joachim@secworks.se writes:
Shouldn't INSTALL mention this?
INSTALL is the generic GNU installation instructions, and intended for the user who has downloaded a release tarball. I'd prefer to not add any nettle-specific info there.
Reading the INSTALL file it wasn't obvious it only related to users using the dist tarball. If it was me I would have added a paragraph noting that for users cloning the repo they should do something else/additionally to INSTALL the sw.
The README file mentions building from git and refers to http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/nettle/ for instructions. That page says "After checkout, you need to run the .bootstrap script before the standard ./configure && make.". Maybe that could be made clearer in some way?
At least not having one indirection in documentation. I think the bootstrap should be mentioned directly in a README, INSTALL etc file directly in the reop. REPO might also be a good name for info on the contents and usage of the repo.
Also, should the build process for users of the distributiion be mentioned also in the README? It is basically the same info in README and INSTALL. I suggest changing to "see INSTALL for build instructions." in the README. And place something about the git repo and bootstrap in that file.
- -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours
Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning. ======================================================================== Joachim Strömbergson Secworks AB joachim@secworks.se ========================================================================
Joachim Strömbergson joachim@secworks.se writes:
At least not having one indirection in documentation. I think the bootstrap should be mentioned directly in a README, INSTALL etc file directly in the reop.
I did some small changes to the README, to try to make it clearer.
Regards, /Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Aloha!
Niels Möller wrote:
Joachim Strömbergson joachim@secworks.se writes:
At least not having one indirection in documentation. I think the bootstrap should be mentioned directly in a README, INSTALL etc file directly in the reop.
I did some small changes to the README, to try to make it clearer.
Much better, thanks!
- -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours
Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning. ======================================================================== Joachim Strömbergson Secworks AB joachim@secworks.se ========================================================================
nettle-bugs@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Joachim Strömbergson -
nisse＠lysator.liu.se