Projects / sdd / Comments

Comments for sdd

25 Feb 2002 03:45 schily

Re: Build System

> Ick, ick ick. What the heck is wrong
> with standard
> autoconf? It's portable, it's

Before complaining you should _read_ what happens
when compiling....

The Schily Makfile system does use autoconf.

However, it avoids to use autoconf to create self
vodifying makefiles which is a technique of the
1970s. The Schily Makefilesystem combines state
of the art techniques:

- Enhanced autoconf (the offocial is only 50% ready)

- A structured set of object oriented
make rules (this is an idea from the 1980s
found in Plan9, the SunOS Kernel and the
BSD Kernel, the Schily makefilesystem
only added portability).

- If you use 'smake' which is a automake
enabled make program, the Schily
Makefile system allows you to compile on
more platforms then the FSF featured
Method would allow! The platform specific
make rules only add extra knowledge,
they are not needed if you use a decent
automake enabled make program because
such a program will create the files
when needed but unavailable.

- It is not possible to use a POSIX only
make for portable compilation.

17 Jul 2001 18:48 brouhaha

Re: Build System

> Ick, ick ick. What the heck is wrong


Instead of complaining, why not contribute back an
improved version?

I've had trouble figuring out how to use autoconf
for my own projects, so it doesn't surprise me at
all that not everyone has started using it.

17 Jul 2001 14:56 quotemstr

Build System
Ick, ick ick. What the heck is wrong with standard
autoconf? It's portable, it's familiar, and it's
very versatile. There is no excuse for using such
a crappy build system only to push your own make.
Not to mention, you have files there for virtually
every architecture known to man, and your
quivering mound of hacks won't even work with
POSIX make.

Screenshot

Project Spotlight

ReciJournal

An open, cross-platform journaling program.

Screenshot

Project Spotlight

Veusz

A scientific plotting package.