httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ralf S. Engelschall" <>
Subject Re: Suggestion: shtool
Date Wed, 28 Apr 1999 07:00:37 GMT

In article <> you wrote:
> Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>> In article <> you wrote:
>> > Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>> >> In article <> you wrote:
>> >> > [...]
>> > I still don't think that a single script is an advantage, modules exist
>> > for a reason. Also, I totally agree with the comment about libtool - if
>> > it works its great, but if it doesn't it seems to be totally impossible
>> > to fix (and, in my experience, it doesn't). I haven't looked at shtool,
>> > but the fact it is a single script does not bode well.
>> It's not really fair to not look at the code but to give a general mark on it
>> just because it's a single script. That sounds as would all single scripts be
>> bad which is like saying any single executable not using DSO for its parts is
>> bad IMHO. Hmmm... I would appreciate more closer looks at the package before
>> it is given a mark.
> I repeat: modules exist for a reason. I do not need to look at your
> script to know it could be modularised, since it appears to be a design
> aim to demodularise it. That is sufficient reason to not even bother to
> look at it. If something is based on bad design principles, it is simply
> not worth my time to look at the detailed design.

Ben, please stop this. shtool _IS_ modularised. When you would be not such
convinced from your point of view and actually have a look a the distribution
you would recognize that it contains the various sh.* scripts (= the modules)
and the resulting shtool is just an on-the-fly merged version of these
modules. Exactly the same principle when you build an executable out of
various object files (where I hope you don't also think it's bad design).  And
you would not avoid to use an executable, so I cannot understand why you would
avoid to use shtool.

But ok....
                                       Ralf S. Engelschall

View raw message