[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]


I'm not pushing the autoconf stuff as hard as others. I had a scheme for
using autoconf: see the Linux-PAM-0-72-autoconf branch on sourceforge:

> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/Linux-PAM/?cvsroot=pam&hideattic=0&only_with_tag=Linux-PAM-0-72-autoconf#dirlist

which autoconfs the creation of two files in the top level directory,
which get included by every makefile (Make.Rules) and c-files
(pam_aconf.h). This sort of mirrors the defs/* file approach we have at
present and reflects my general bias against having too much automated
source generation, but uses autoconf to do local configuration.

Steve and David have been advocating a more traditional autoconf route
which turns every Makefile into a Makefile.in and autoconf gets to build
every Makefile. They seem to have more energy than I do so I'd say
they're approach is winning by default.

> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/Linux-PAM/?cvsroot=pam&hideattic=0&only_with_tag=autoconf-modules

If anyone wants to help with either effort, their suggestions, patches
etc., will be welcome. [Although, given David and Steve's general
distaste for my approach, I'll need some positive feedback to invest
more effort into it.]

If folk want to use the pam-discuss mailing list on sourceforge for
focussed autoconf project discussions that would be fine with me:


[When I created the sourceforge site, I was a little zealous in adding
this list without realizing that I couldn't delete it again, so its
going to waste at the moment.]



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []