On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Stepan Kasal <kasal@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 05:53:48PM +0200, Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
> > Ideally that would be just "autoreconf -i" in all autoconfiscated projects.
>
> well, why "-i". Shouldn't it _ideally_ be just "autoreconf"?
Touche :) I guess it's a choice between optimising the bootstrap, or
optimising re-bootstrap after updating one of the autotools.
> > [...] extending autoreconf - perhaps by providing
>
> > ${pkgdatadir}/autoreconf.d/ into which other packages can drop files
> > that get run whenever one invokes autoreconf?
>
> Well, such an extensible framework might work.
It would have to know in which order to execute commands. intltoolize
after autopoint, for example.
> But IMHO, the best comfort/complexity ratio of all such meta-autoconf
> tools provides Good Old Shell. IOW a few lines of shell in a
> customized ./bootstrap is worth a thisand of intelligent perl
> bootstrappers.
It's just that my sense of aesthetics is offended by the existence of
a *thousand* such collections of a "few lines" of shell in a
customised ./{autogen,bootstrap}.sh amongst all the autoconfiscated
packages out there. And those "few lines" invariably grow until one
can't trivially grasp their correctness with one glance. They're all
asymptotically growing towards autoreconf-like intelligence anyway!
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
