On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote: > On Sunday 04 November 2001 10:26 am, Sander Temme wrote: > > on 11/4/01 10:12 AM, Justin Erenkrantz at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > What's wrong with ./config.nice? =) -- justin > > > > That it is ephemeral? It gets overwritten the next time you invoke > > configure, so if you want to experiment with options you lose anything but > > your last run. I keep my little build script outside my working copy. > > I just keep my config.nice script outside of my working copy, and that > problem goes away. :-)
I do the same thing. I just have a little collection of ./config.nice's, and that's all I need. As for the installer.sh concept, I'm -0, because I feel it isn't needed. As Pier pointed out, there are still almost as many steps with installer.sh as doing it manually. Besides, I tend to redo certain parts at certain times, so even if installer.sh did all steps at once, it still wouldn't help me much. For example, I tend to run variations on make clean/distclean/extraclean depending on what I'm doing and how many other things have changed in the system in the meanwhile... it's pretty easy to do that by hand and I feel it gives me more control over the thing. Anyone using a checked-out-from-CVS copy of Apache is probably a developer, and yet installer.sh hides the output of buildconf/configure/etc, making it harder for the developers to notice any problems that might be happening in the build system. My $0.02... --Cliff -------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
