After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 739427 - USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 seems redundant
USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 seems redundant
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: java-atk-wrapper
Classification: Applications
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: java-atk-wrapper maintainer(s)
java-atk-wrapper maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2014-10-30 22:08 UTC by Magdalen Berns (irc magpie)
Modified: 2015-02-27 16:56 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
One example (1.70 KB, patch)
2014-10-31 13:25 UTC, Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias (IRC: infapi00)
committed Details | Review

Description Magdalen Berns (irc magpie) 2014-10-30 22:08:24 UTC
USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 in autogen.sh seems redundant, especially on reading the following discussion at https://mail.gnome.org/archives/games-list/2010-November/msg00007.html
Comment 1 Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias (IRC: infapi00) 2014-10-31 13:25:39 UTC
Created attachment 289743 [details] [review]
One example

(In reply to comment #0)
> USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 in autogen.sh seems redundant, especially on reading the
> following discussion at
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/games-list/2010-November/msg00007.html

Yes I agree, and thanks to this bug I realized that the same happens with atk.

As a reference, I used gtk's autogen.sh, and removed the gtkdoc check (as jaw doesn't use it). You could use as a reference (or not). In general this is really similar to at-spi one, but with some extra checks and informative error messages.
Comment 2 Magdalen Berns (irc magpie) 2014-10-31 18:51:33 UTC
Review of attachment 289743 [details] [review]:

This seems like a good way to go for an update to the script. It builds ok and seems to draw attention to some warnings which seems likely to be of use.

One small thing I am not totally sure about is the rationale for removing REQUIRED_AUTOMAKE_VERSION altogether? Can you clarify why you chose to do that?
Comment 3 Magdalen Berns (irc magpie) 2014-11-01 13:09:20 UTC
Review of attachment 289743 [details] [review]:

I am committing this myself since it is the weekend and I have some time to do some follow up work before Monday.[1] Besides that I think it is safe to say we can trust it to be good. :-)

Thanks for your work.

[1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/java-atk-wrapper/commit/?id=63ec9208d5d004244cc270bf1510ff5273976a03

::: autogen.sh
@@ -9,2 @@
-PKG_NAME=java-atk-wrapper
-USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 . gnome-autogen.sh

Just thinking I should comment on this 

. gnome-autogen.sh
	 
so there is a reference to it in the bug. I noticed running this on osx raised an error so I think it is right that you chose to remove it. However, I am a bit unsure what it would have been for once. Any ideas?
Comment 4 Magdalen Berns (irc magpie) 2014-11-01 13:09:25 UTC
Review of attachment 289743 [details] [review]:

I am committing this myself since it is the weekend and I have some time to do some follow up work before Monday.[1] Besides that I think it is safe to say we can trust it to be good. :-)

Thanks for your work.

[1] https://git.gnome.org/browse/java-atk-wrapper/commit/?id=63ec9208d5d004244cc270bf1510ff5273976a03

::: autogen.sh
@@ -9,2 @@
-PKG_NAME=java-atk-wrapper
-USE_GNOME2_MACROS=1 . gnome-autogen.sh

Just thinking I should comment on this 

. gnome-autogen.sh
	 
so there is a reference to it in the bug. I noticed running this on osx raised an error so I think it is right that you chose to remove it. However, I am a bit unsure what it would have been for once. Any ideas?
Comment 5 Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias (IRC: infapi00) 2014-11-01 14:20:07 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> Review of attachment 289743 [details] [review]:

> One small thing I am not totally sure about is the rationale for removing
> REQUIRED_AUTOMAKE_VERSION altogether? Can you clarify why you chose to do that?

As I said that autogen.sh is basically a C&P of gtk's autogen, that doesn't include that check. If you find it necessary you just can add it.

(In reply to comment #3)

> . gnome-autogen.sh
> 
> so there is a reference to it in the bug. I noticed running this on osx raised
> an error so I think it is right that you chose to remove it. However, I am a
> bit unsure what it would have been for once. Any ideas?

This new autogen already calls autoreconf and others to create the configure, so doing what is currently doing and additionally calling gnome-autogen.sh is redundant. So the options is or using a manually-written autogen.sh or calling gnome-autogen.sh. You can see what gnome-autogen.sh does here:

https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-common/tree/macros2/gnome-autogen.sh
Comment 6 André Klapper 2015-02-27 16:56:37 UTC
[Moving at-spi/java-atk-wrapper bugs to separate product. See bug 740075]