Re: Site Macro Directory

[Guido Draheim]

Es schrieb "Mark D. Roth":
> 
> On Thu May 16 05:59 2002 -0400, Thomas E. Dickey wrote:
> > aclocal has good intentions, poor design.
> 
> I don't really understand why everyone says that like there's nothing
> we can do about it.  If the design is poor and inconvenient, let's fix
> it!  That is why it's called "software", after all. :)
> 
> > there's nothing to stop - but my point: the given approach makes it less
> > likely that someone will be able to easily get the macros since they're
> > in a site-specific somewhere-else.  I've seen far too many crappy packages
> > built with the automake scheme where I cannot find the associated macros.
> 
> I'm not sure that I agree that having a site macro directory makes it
> any more likely for developers to screw things up.  However, even if
> that is the case, we can have autoconf cache any macros that get used
> in the aclocal.m4 file, just like aclocal does.  That way you still
> get a copy of all of the necessary macros as part of the distributed
> package, but it happens automatically and without the need to install
> a seperate package.  Would that address this objection?
> 

HINT:
there is an "acinclude" tool in the ac-archive.sf.net distribution,
it will create an acinclude.m4 file from a set of macro-holder dirs...

 :-)
-- guido                                    http://ac-archive.sf.net