[GRASS5] GRASS 6.0.1RC1 released

Markus Neteler neteler at itc.it
Thu Aug 4 16:05:57 EDT 2005

(cc ML for the archive)

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 11:59:09AM -0500, William Kyngesburye wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Markus Neteler wrote:
> >On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 09:16:03AM -0500, William K wrote:
> >
> >>bug #2544
> >>
> >
> >OK.
> >
> >Find attached a modified
> > configure
> >to test. Please report, then I'll update in CVS.
> >
> it works

If there are no objections, I'll update aclocal.m4 and
configure in CVS tomorrow (for RC2 and 6.1-CVS).

> >Are we sure that it doesn't break things for other
> >Mac versions?
> >
> I've used that form of SHLIB_LD in 10.3 and 10.4.  And a slightly  
> different form when I was on 10.2, but that was because of changes in  
> the GRASS make variables for version and install dir.
> It's the standard way of building libraries for all versions of Mac  
> OS X (the install_name and xxx_version parts).  The flat_namespace  
> and fno_common are pretty normal for Mac OS X UNIX-ported software  
> and have pretty much the same effect (as far as I can tell) as the  
> single_module option that was there before, but I never see single- 
> module used coming out of libtool-enabled source.  (now that I said  
> that, I'll probably find something that uses single-module and find  
> out why ^_^)
> I'm not sure about the Rhapsody part.  Libtool handles rhapsody and  
> darwin1 the same for some stuff, but darwin* is handled alone (Mac OS  
> 10.4 is darwin 8.x, 10.3 is darwin 7.x, 10.2 is 6.x), so there is  
> much that is darwin-specific and only a little that is shared between  
> darwin and rhapsody.  This is just from searching for 'rhapsody' and  
> 'darwin' in ltmain.sh, I really don't know much about rhapsody or the  
> early days of darwin.
> One note: if I could figure out a reliable method for getting a  
> release version as integer, I would add that to the current_version  
> option.  But GRASS_VERSION_RELEASE gets RC and CVS at various  
> stages.

Ah, now I understand. Yes, we have "1RC1" currently as RELEASE.
It doesn't harm for other platforms (apparently).

> Does it matter whether the versions are added indirectly in  
> configure, like the way I have it now (\${GRASS_VERSION_MAJOR}, etc)  
> or directly in configure (remove the backslash so it expands  
> immediately)?  The darwin section could have a little extra parsing  
> before setting SHLIB_LD to say: if it's CVS, make the release '0', if  
> it's a RC, extract the target release number (not the RC number),  
> otherwise use the number as is.

Discussion is open!
My intention was simply to get the RC state into the VERSION to
avoid confusion. Probably we need a modified scheme for that.


More information about the grass-dev mailing list