On Wed, Sep 27, 2006, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Build processes": > * "Stop the Autoconf Insanity" - http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/889/
This guy is clearly confused (or worse). Right off the bat he says "[the user] runs "./configure --prefix=/opt". The configure script runs for a while, then exits with an error which basically translates to "You have an autoconf version which is three weeks old; please upgrade"" As (almost?) everyone knows, the "./configure" script does *NOT* require that you have autoconf installed, but rather it is a simple shell script designed to be as portable as possible. Autoconf is used to *generate* this script, and ordinary users never have to run it. Also, this guy clearly is not aware of the situation that existed *before* autoconf - stuff like edit-the-Makefile, Imakefile, Larry Wall's "Metaconfigure" (or whatever it was called) - all required much more work from the user. The fact that the configure script can find "lib-lzw" in "only" 99% of the cases and has trouble in 1% of the cases is infinitely better than the previous status quo where the Makefile needed tweaking in 50% of the cases. And with autoconf, if you email the author with the problem on your machine, he can easily add an autoconf test so that next time, the library will be found on those pesky 1% as well, automatically. He also describes a situation where "make" runs "configure". That's just silly. Nobody does that, and it doesn't even make sense (running configure would overwrite the Makefile you're now using - what's the point in that?). If these are the types of arguments he makes against autoconf, you better ignore this article... He then describes a 50,000 line long Makefile. Ah?? Last time I checked, autoconf did not make Makefile grow. A huge "./configure" script, yes, but who'd want to read that anyway? A huge Makefile - that's the fault of the person who created that Makefile, not Autoconf's fault. Or perhaps some other tool (automake?) does this - but not autoconf. His strangest argument against Autoconf (for developers) is that using it requires knowledge of m4. So what? When I felt the need to use autoconf (when some code I wrote had trouble compiling on the 5 or so Unix variants I had access to), I simply sat down and spent a few hours reading the manual. I think it was on the bus on my way to work :-) And then, suddenly, I had a tool which let me easily compile my code on all those systems, and to easily support new systems. The time I sent learning a (tiny) bit of m4 was well worth the benefits I got from using autoconf. -- Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Sep 27 2006, 6 Tishri 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |If God had intended us to be vegetarians, http://nadav.harel.org.il |He wouldn't have made animals out of meat ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
