[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Get rid of libtool? [was Re: Makefile problems]
From: |
Tom Tromey |
Subject: |
Re: Get rid of libtool? [was Re: Makefile problems] |
Date: |
15 Jul 2002 17:26:25 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
>>>>> "Nathanael" == Nathanael Nerode <address@hidden> writes:
Nathanael> Automake is quite good at generating dependencies for
Nathanael> things which behave 'normally': C files compiled to O files
Nathanael> with the same name, & so on. In fact it appears to do so
Nathanael> via ordinary suffix rules.
It appears to, but in fact it doesn't, and can't. I wish it could!
Anyway, problems in this area are why you see requirements that
automake know certain things statically, all the EXTRA_ stuff, etc.
Nathanael> What it does do is to demand extra work for the maintainer
Nathanael> in order to tell Automake that theses *are* unusual cases.
Nathanael> This isn't positive for dependency handling.
I think it would help my understanding if you gave a concrete
example. My perspective is that usually automake doesn't make things
any worse, since you can always write your own rules and add stuff,
just like with make.
Nathanael> I don't think it's wise to tell developers that a program
Nathanael> will 'take care' of their dependencies, and unfortunately
Nathanael> that's the message being sent out by automake.
By what mechanism is this message sent? Perhaps there is text in the
manual we could change? These are quasi-rhetorical questions, since I
don't think we actually send that message at all. But, of course,
there is always some distance between what one writes (or projects)
and what one thinks one writes (or projects); we can address this if
it refers to something concrete.
Nathanael> The message sent by automake, sadly, is "Make is a bad
Nathanael> tool. Make is hard to use."
I've probably said that, though I don't have a reference. It doesn't
really capture my current understanding though. `make' is an adequate
tool for its purpose. Unfortunately its limitations show through; the
world has changed from underneath it.
Nathanael> Which *would* be fine, except that automake documentation
Nathanael> tells you that you don't need to write it by hand, libtool
Nathanael> documentation is less than would be desirable on using
Nathanael> libtool without automake (the information's actually mostly
Nathanael> there, in fact, but its use is actively discouraged), and
Nathanael> automake-generated Makefiles are often nearly
Nathanael> undecipherable.
These days we document LINK and COMPILE. Perhaps the docs need to be
expanded.
Tom