Popt has unnecessary command

[Randy McMurchy]

Noted in the popt instructions is an autoreconf command.

This is totally unnecessary and should be removed from the book. Here is the result of two builds, the only difference being the second one uses autoreconf, the first does not:

rml@rmlinux: ~/build > ls -l popt?/lib popt1/lib: total 172 -rw-r--r-- 1 rml install 87800 May 16 09:00 libpopt.a -rwxr-xr-x 1 rml install 803 May 16 09:00 libpopt.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 rml install 16 May 16 09:00 libpopt.so -> libpopt.so.0.0.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 rml install 16 May 16 09:00 libpopt.so.0 -> libpopt.so.0.0.0 -rwxr-xr-x 1 rml install 70664 May 16 09:00 libpopt.so.0.0.0

popt2/lib: total 172 -rw-r--r-- 1 rml install 87800 May 16 09:03 libpopt.a -rwxr-xr-x 1 rml install 803 May 16 09:03 libpopt.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 rml install 16 May 16 09:03 libpopt.so -> libpopt.so.0.0.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 rml install 16 May 16 09:03 libpopt.so.0 -> libpopt.so.0.0.0 -rwxr-xr-x 1 rml install 70664 May 16 09:03 libpopt.so.0.0.0

rml@rmlinux: ~/build > cmp popt1/lib/libpopt.so.0.0.0 popt2/lib/libpopt.so.0.0.0 rml@rmlinux: ~/build >

[tushar@…]

It is safer to keep the autoreconf for now. The tarball that the maintainer generated initially did not have include some key autotools files. (That is the tarball that I have.) Down the line, someone notified the maintainer about the missing files and he recreated the tarball with the appropriate files but did not change the version number. So there are two files floating around the net with the same version number. For folks who download the first tarball the command is required, for the second the command is superfluous.

BTW, I came to know of the two different tarballs after I updated the book.

Please comment on how the book should be updated.

[Randy McMurchy]

Well, that would explain everything: :-)

1. Autoreconf not necessary
2. Wrong md5sum
3. Wrong size of download file

I fixed 2 and 3, not knowing about this two tarball thing. However it is probably best to keep it, as that is what users who download will see now.

I also added some doxygen doc installation commands.

the only thing I can see left is to pull out the autoreconf when you feel comfortable, and then change the SBU to 0.1 as it configures- compiles very fast, it must the be autoreconf taking the extra time.

I changed the Milestone to future, in case we leave autoreconf in until after the release (though I can't see leaving it in that long and then having it in a final release book)

[archaic@…]

How about a note box about the 2 tarballs and to ensure the md5 is right? Then you can pull the autoreconf without worry.

[Randy McMurchy]

It will have been 3 months since the release of the defective tarball and replacements have been available to fix it. There is no reason to keep the autoreconf in the instructions for the BLFS-6.2 release.

[dnicholson@…]

I think it's fine for removal. As long as the user checks the md5sum, they'll know they have the right package.