On Mon, 24 May 1999, Thomas Tanner wrote:
> what do you think about using GNU autoconf/automake/libtool for Mesa?
>
> These tools are used by most modern open source packages,
> simplify and standardize the installation process
> (configure; make; make install) and make it much easier
> to port the package to other platforms.
>
> It would replace the mklib.* scripts and autodetect platform
> specific features such as MMX support, X11 paths, compilers etc.
> libtool is able to build shared libraries on nearly all Unix-like
> platforms (incl. BeOS) and static libraries on all platforms.
> This build system could friendly coexist with the DOS/Win/Amiga
> Makefiles, except that the file "Makefile" would be overwritten.
>
> Comments?
I found the manuals for autoconf/automake to be rather confusing -
especially since the automake manual referred to a lot of features
that are marked obsolete (and not discussed) in the autoconf manual.
Also, each manual seemed to assume that you understood all of the
other manual before you start reading.
Having said that, I certainly don't regret using autoconf/automake
in my two OpenSource packages...and I'm still a novice at using
those packages.
I certainly agree that Mesa should go this way. It's so much
easier for the average user to simply unpack the files and
type the canonical:
./configure ; make ; make install
...compared to having to read all those README.xxx files and
figure out what to do.
One tricky issue may be detecting whether a Voodoo Card is
present (and which kind).
Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
Raytheon Systems Inc. (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hti.com
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
