On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 05:06:12PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Sunday 26 October 2008, Robert Schwebel wrote: > > So IMHO, there are only two sane solutions: > > > > * autotools > > * kbuild > > > > They have enough critical mass in the community that they really do > > solve people's problems. > > i think those serve different markets. autoconf is for easily discovering > all > the weird host idiosyncrasies while kbuild is for people to easily customize > a build of something. we arent talking about making people manually select > test suites, just to have the tests be able to figure out a bit of what will > and wont compile.
Well, part of the recent discussion was also about making tests for example architecture dependend; this could also be achieved with kbuild. However, autotools would be my very favourite. IMHO, there are a few issues which have to be taken into account: - full autotools (autoconf+automake+libtool) is slow, compared to hand written makefiles - autoconf-only may have issues, becuase the makefiles themselfs stay handwritten in that case and thus may behave differently from what people are used to rsc -- Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
