On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 16:25 -0500, Dan Manthey wrote: > > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Braden McDaniel wrote: > > > While you can use any value you want as the argument to a --with-* > > option, anything other than "yes" or "no" usually complicates the UI and > > should generally be avoided unless it is a clear simplification (IMO). > > > > So why not: > > > > ./configure --with-package1 --with-package2 > > > > Braden > > > > You're confusing the semantics of --enable-* and --with-*. I'm not. > --with-* is > intended to specify use of an optional external package and as such often > needs to have the external package's location specified (e.g. > --with-X=/usr/local/X11R6). CPPFLAGS, LDFLAGS are generally better for that. > If you consider a "package" to instead be an > interface, say to a set of functions, it becomes sensible to specify > multiple implementing packages that each provide the interface (e.g. > --with-line-ui=readline,some-other-thing). I don't know if such an > interpretation is sanctioned by Autoconf, but it's well within the scope > of --with-*, in which case, it may be reasonable for --with-foo=bar,quux > to also be expressed as --with-foo=bar --with-foo=quux. Better, IMO, to provide mutually exclusive options and emit an error message if they are used together. -- Braden McDaniel e-mail: <braden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <http://endoframe.com> Jabber: <braden@xxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
