[PATCH util-modular 6/6] release.sh: run ./configure within the release.sh

[Peter Hutterer]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 03:39:18PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 13 November 2016 at 22:24, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 03:45:29PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
> >> From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov at collabora.com>
[...]
> >> +        return 1
> >>      fi
> >> -    build_dir=`dirname $status_file`
> >> +
> >>      cd $build_dir
> >>      if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
> >>       echo "Error: failed to cd to $MODULE_RPATH/$build_dir."
> >> @@ -377,6 +373,15 @@ process_module() {
> >>       return 1
> >>      fi
> >>
> >> +    # Using ../ here feels a bit nasty, yet $top_src is an absolute path. Thus
> >> +    # it will get propagated in the generated sources, which we do not want.
> >> +    ../configure >/dev/null
> >> +    if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
> >> +        echo "Error: failed to configure module."
> >> +        cd $top_src
> >
> > I'd really like to see more pushd/popd, but that's unrelated to this patch.
> > Looks good, but I think you should look at the effort to do a full local
> > clone, it may only be a few lines and it should remove quite a bit of the
> > error checking.
> >
> Yes I'm thinking/working towards having things in a cleaner state. At
> the same time this patch would cause a noticeable change in workflow,
> so I've intentionally opted out of making things too intrusive.
> 
> Any objections against git worktree and/or moving towards it as a
> follow-up change ?
> Or you'd thinking this patch should be "it's all or nothing" kind of change ?

simply said, I don't know enough about worktrees to have an opinion here,
sorry. for the mere tarball generation and distcheck run you can use a
shallow clone though, can't you? Just something to keep in mind, if the
worktree works as a clean checkout without detritus, I'll be happy with tha
too.

Cheers,
   Peter