Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 15:18:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Mo DeJong <mdejong@cygnus.com>
To: dev@apr.apache.org
Subject: Re: Patch to fix dirs when builddir != srcdir
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012152349240.2652-100000@rossini.schumann.cx>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.1001215151300.7955H@cse.cygnus.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Sascha Schumann wrote:

> > Could someone tell me why it was done this way? Is there
> > any reason we could not switch over to using automake?
> 
>     automake is unsuitable for projects with a large set of
>     variables and/or Makefiles (because it shifts substitutions
>     from make to sed which becomes annoingly slow quickly).
>     Additionally, the dependency tracking is inherently build
>     around GNU utilities.

Ok, so you don't like automake and gnu make.

>     It is very likely that APR will switch to a more suitable
>     build-system in the near future.
> 
>     I don't think there is anything currently which runs
>     config.status automatically (I have not looked at it for
>     quite some time though), so it should not fubar your build
>     out of the blue.
> 
>     - Sascha

I run ./config.status and I expect it to work. Having a
configure script that does an extra subst after running
./config.status from inside the normal configure script
is just going to confuse people. I don't want to get
back into that discussion of what "standard" means.

I would hope that we could just agree that "does not
confuse the daylights out of people who are used
to working with autoconf and related tools" would
be something to shoot for. Sure, you could go off
and do it differently for your project, by why bother
being different?

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc