Re: idea about how autotools workflow/usability can be improved

[Eric Blake]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

According to Martin Olsson on 9/14/2008 1:42 AM:
> Hi,
> 
> I've just started free software development and I'm learning autotools.
> While trying to
> build different free software packages I've found one that I think can
> be improved in
> autotools. Basically, every time I want to build a completely new code
> base I go through
> this process where I run configure or autogen.sh, it then tells me I
> need package "abc",
> so then I install package abc and finally I try running
> configure/autogen.sh again.

Running autogen.sh is typically only necessary for a package's maintainer,
and not for downstream clients of a prepackaged tarball; if you have to
run it every time, then report that as a bug to that package maintainer.

> Rinse and repeat about 3-10 times depending on the complexity of the
> code base.
> 
> I'd suggest that you by default will instead check all the package
> requirements upfront
> and then print a list of all the missing packages directly.

In general, this sounds like something that should be done by the package
maintainer, so you may be better off reporting your request to the
packages that took several false starts.  Yes, autoconf could be more
helpful here, if someone were to contribute a macro which makes checking
for a prerequisite library an easier task; in particular, your idea of
making a missing prerequisite library a deferred rather than immediate
error has merit.  But someone has to contribute the code.

- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!

Eric Blake             address@hidden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjOVe0ACgkQ84KuGfSFAYD4KwCfR9RIa7CToXqvGnUrID1u0sn0
mxUAn1EpiZVU/TcmIm9/iIynJHfmBRqP
=F8Dy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----