Re: [tor-bugs] #6524 [Tor Client]: [PATCH] move to non-recursive make

["Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki" <torproject-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#6524: [PATCH] move to non-recursive make
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  stewart      |          Owner:  stewart           
     Type:  enhancement  |         Status:  needs_revision    
 Priority:  normal       |      Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.4.x-final
Component:  Tor Client   |        Version:  Tor: unspecified  
 Keywords:               |         Parent:                    
   Points:               |   Actualpoints:                    
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment(by meyering):

 Replying to [comment:21 nickm]:
 > It appears there's a problem with automake-1.7.  When I try to build
 with it, I eventually get:
 > {{{
 ...
 > src/common/util_codedigest.c:12:1: fatal error: opening dependency file
 .deps/src/common/util_codedigest.Tpo: No such file or directory
 > compilation terminated.
 > }}}

 IME, there is no point in accommodating such an old version of automake.
 In fact, there are good reasons *not* to accommodate use of old
 automake and autoconf, not least of which is security of those
 who run "make dist" and "make distcheck".  For reference, these
 two bugs usually render those users vulnerable:

     http://bugzilla.redhat.com/CVE-2012-3386
     http://bugzilla.redhat.com/CVE-2009-4029

 Add to that the fact that your (developer) time is precious
 enough as it is.  Don't waste it on something like that.
 If anyone complains, tell them their use of old automake
 poses a security risk and besides, also results in inferior
 configure files.

 That is why I put a line like this in configure.ac of each project I tend:

   AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([1.11.1 no-dist-gzip dist-xz color-tests parallel-
 tests])

 That requires at least automake-1.11.1.
 I should bump it to 1.12 soon.

 Your users might appreciate it if you were to add "dist-xz" to that
 list of automake options, since the xz-compressed tarball is 30% smaller
 than the .gz one.  For coreutils, grep and a few others, I've been
 distributing only xz-compressed tarballs (i.e., dropped .tar.gz
 altogether)
 for almost a year with no real complaints.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6524#comment:23>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs