Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] User Interface
From: Joshua Haberman (joshua_AT_haberman.com)
Date: Sun Jul 29 2001 - 04:01:26 EEST
* Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net) wrote:
> >I think it's a better idea to include configure in CVS. Some macros only
> >exist in certain versions of autoconf, and other variables may enter into
> >play that make building it on the fly problematic.
>
> Thats precisely why I don't think it should be in CVS. If you can't
> get your system to run the autoconf tools correctly on the
> configure.in file, the chances are you've got a lot more trouble
> coming down the line. Better to catch that in the very first instance,
> rather than leave it till later. libtool in particular can be a source
> of tremendous pain if not caught correctly at this stage.
I can't say anything about libtool because I've never used it, but I
don't see how failure to correctly generate configure is indicatave of
anything. For example, I unknowingly wrote some macros in my configure.in
that only work on autoconf 2.50 and up. If you try to run an earlier
version of autoconf, it errors out and you're left with nothing. This
doesn't mean the build environment is broken, though--with a correctly
generated configure, the program builds fine.
If you go to great pains to make sure your configure.in is portable
across all versions of autoconf, then that's great. But in general, I
think the configure script is more portable than its input
(configure.in).
Right now Debian is experiencing the pains of moving from Autoconf 2.13
to 2.50. (check out this thread:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-0105/msg01611.html). Many packages
wouldn't build correctly with 2.50, and so Debian's keeping 2.13 around
until all packages will build correctly with 2.50
> Furthermore, if a user has local hacks to the autoconf tools so that
> certain things work correctly on their system, they will never appear
> in the configure script.
If a user needs local hacks in autoconf to get configure scripts to work
for them, I think the autoconf maintainers would like to hear about it.
Isn't the whole point of a configure script to be able to accommadate for
all possible situations and configurations?
Joshua
-- Joshua Haberman <joshua_AT_haberman.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jul 29 2001 - 04:02:31 EEST