Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

README.txt is slightly wrong #7

Open
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Jul 27, 2015 · 4 comments
Open

README.txt is slightly wrong #7

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Jul 27, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

In README.txt, it states:

`svn co http://protobuf.googlecode.com/svn/tags/2.4.1 protobuf`

This does not provide an enjoyable environment to build protocol buffers in. 
You still need to run autoconf/automake, and this is documented nowhere (that I 
could find).

To make it easier on your users, change the line to use the provided 2.4.1 .zip 
package: `wget http://protobuf.googlecode.com/files/protobuf-2.4.1.zip && unzip 
protobuf-2.4.1.zip && rm protobuf-2.4.1.zip && mv protobuf-2.4.1 protobuf`

Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 19 Jan 2013 at 12:02

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

(Thank you)

Original comment by [email protected] on 19 Jan 2013 at 12:03

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

I think you still need to do autoconf/automake in order to translate 
Makefile.am -> Makefile.in -> Makefile in the src directory. 

Original comment by [email protected] on 31 Jan 2013 at 3:10

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

[deleted comment]

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

I don't believe you do, but maybe you do (?). The issue is that the steps to 
build protocol buffers are not correctly documented in the svn trunk.

The README.txt in both the .zip I linked and the raw repository states as the 
first step:

  $ ./configure

There is no configure script provided in svn tags/2.4.1, but there is in the 
.zip I linked. I'm not really familiar with autoconf/automake, but is this 
script not generated by that buildchain?

Hope I explained that clearly, and, sorry, if I'm missing something obvious 
somewhere.

Original comment by [email protected] on 31 Jan 2013 at 9:08

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant