Re: [rfc] Move Makefile.in:VERSION to VERSION file

Eli Zaretskii
2001-03-19T09:20:00Z

On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> > Can we have a different name, please? Why can't we have version.c in
> > the first place, without any intermediaries? COPYING was an external
> > file, but VERSION is not, I believe.
>
> I thought about that. The reasons I created a separate file containing
> just the version, rather than putting it in version.c, were two fold:
>
> o keep it completly separate
> from the source
>
> o make the update process as
> robust (mindless) as possible.

I must be missing something, because I don't see how these two goals
contradict what I suggested. Why is it okay to edit a file called
VERSION by hand, but not a file called version.c?

Also, how about if you put the version string into Makefile.in (as a
Make variable), and have Sed create version.c using that variable?

> What exactly is the restriction on the filenames? ``VERSION'' is a
> fairly natural place to put a version number.

The restriction is ``complicated'', as they say ;-). But if you call the
file just ``version'' (lower case) or ``version.in'', it will work.