On 24-May-99 Brian Paul wrote:
> I'm tempted to defer this to the next major release, just to avoid
> problems.
OK.
> For the long term though I think autoconf probably is the right way
> to go. A few concerns:
>
> 1. As you point out, there's probably a few non-Unix systems that
> don't have autoconf but work with the existing Makefiles. Traditional
> Makefiles will probably still be needed.
As long as you don't run "configure" the existing Makefiles won't
be overwritten. I think this is acceptable. You can also build
Mesa outside the source tree, which will leave the source tree untouched.
> 2. I've had several offers from people to write autoconf scripts in
> the past but when I ask about them about maintenance they seem to go
> silent. Someone will have to maintain this stuff, or at least document
> it thoroughly so I can understand it. Maintenance and documentation
> often take more resources than the initial setup.
I'll help to maintain it but in the long run you should
learn at least the basics of autoconf/make (it's really simple!)
There are two very good introductions:
http://www.cygnus.com/~ian/
http://www.amath.washington.edu/~lf/tutorials/autoconf/
As a developer you'll need Perl 5, GNU m4
autoconf 2.13, automake 1.4 and optionally libtool 1.3
Most of them are available from every GNU mirror.
Thomas Tanner -----------------------------------------
email: tanner@(ffii.org|gnu.org|ggi-project.org|gmx.de)
web: http://home.pages.de/~tanner
GGI/Picasso: http://picasso.ffii.org
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
