apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Do not include <uuid.h> and <uuid/uuid.h> in same file
Date Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:22:35 GMT
Graham Leggett wrote:
> 
> But regardless, a build tool needs to do at least this:
> 
> - Track dependancies properly. If changing a header file does not cause 
> corresponding rebuild of code, the build system is broken.
> 
> - Be as platform independant as possible. Here autoconf scores lots of 
> points by having had wide exposure and a long history.
> 
> - Be reasonably straightforward to use. Here autoconf is not as clear, 
> but we did find that a lot of clarity comes from creating your 
> configure.ac's in as standard a way as possible.

wrowe pines += 3

I'd disagree autoconf scores points, in fact it's gone negative in my book.
Simple fact is that automake (not our issue) autoconf m4 and libtool have proven
very slippery targets.  Yes; solaris, linux, bsd get points here.  AIX, HPUX,
Tru64 and many others show up significant flukes with autoconf.  It's toolchain
is rather long in terms of packages that must be present (especially odd sed
prerequisites.)  And the fact that only bash is well supported is another minus,
since plenty of boxes shipped with ksh or others.

shell-as-a-language is a major weakness for a build system :(

Bill

Mime
View raw message