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

Re: autoconf



David Lee wrote:
> 1. Andrew's proposal is to leave all the Makefiles alone, except for
>    adding a line "include Make.Rules".  This file is generated from its
>    generic template "Make.Rules.in" by the local sysadmin running
>    "configure" (itself derived and distributed, by the package maintainer,
>    from "configure.in").
> 
> 2. Steve and I propose making all the Makefiles derived, by the local
>    sysadmin, from their template "Makefile.in".  We still continue to
>    derive and use Make.Rules, exactly as in Andrew's proposal.

> I request (plead!) that we add this extra functionality, as, indeed, is
> recommended by GNU.
> 

Well, I'd happy to do 2 after we get 1 working, and see it is still
needed.

If you concern is that you need to be able to configure the same tree
for multiple OSes at the same time and (say) make use of a
cross-compiler on one beefy system to prepare stuff for 7 OSes, then
perhaps we can come up with a scheme that looks like this:

   cvs co XXX-PAM
   cd XXX-PAM
   autoconf
   cd ..
   mkdir os_number2
   cd os_number2
   ../XXX-PAM/configure --with-os_number2
   make

The point being at all compiled objects would be built below the
os_number2 directory (and outside the source tree), and the
--with-os_number2 option would communicate os specific details of the
local configuration.

I've seen this scheme used before. It really is a big change, and not
one I want to make any specific release dependent on implementing, but
for the sake of argument, would this sort of thing address your need?

Cheers

Andrew





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