From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1 Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 16:50:54 +0200 Message-ID: References: <8CYT9-4Ou-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <8Dh9k-8lT-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <8DtDz-3xC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> Reply-To: 7eggert@gmx.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: Nix , Karel Zak , List util-linux-ng , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.174]:51183 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757570AbXGEOvr (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2007 10:51:47 -0400 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Nix wrote: > On 4 Jul 2007, DervishD stated: >> Anyway, if you don't like mobs or you just don't want to try it, >> that's fine, but please don't use autotools, it doesn't make much se= nse >> for a linux only project, since you will be using only the "director= y >> choosing" part of autotools. Maybe a hand made script will help (and= I >=20 > Oh, yeah, great, another hand-rolled build system. That's *juwt* what > those of us who have autotools working well (with config.site's that > do all we need and then some) are looking forward to. >=20 > There are advantages to standardization, you know. A *lot* of > autobuilders know how to make autoconf-generated configure scripts ju= mp > through hoops. I was downright *happy* when util-linux was > autoconfiscated: I could ditch the code to handle automatic > configuration of yet another one-package hand-rolled build system. Standardisation is good, but autotools (as they are used) usurally isn'= t. It tests for the availability of a fortran compiler for a C-only project, = checks the width of integers on i386 for projects not caring about that and fa= ils to find installed libraries without telling how it was supposed to find th= em or how to make it find that library. Configuring the build of an autotools program is harder than nescensary= ; if it used a config file, you could easily save it somewhere while addi= ng comments on how and why you did *that* choice, and you could possibly use a set of default configs which you'd just include. The Makefiles generated by autotools is a huge mess, if autotools got i= t wrong (again!), fixing them requires editing a lot of files. I'm really really happy if I read 'edit Makefile.conf and run make...'. --=20 No matter which way you have to march, its always uphill.=20 =46ri=DF, Spammer: n@kqYYs.7eggert.dyndns.org mlygzw.k@d.7eggert.dyndns= =2Eorg cDmOEZ@z-luqs.7eggert.dyndns.org .-@IfuiUgj.7eggert.dyndns.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html