Re: Compile time options

[Sheldon Gill]

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:05, you wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2004, at 11:14 PM, Sheldon Gill wrote:
> > I propose that we separate these "internal behaviour" compile time
> > options
>
> Well. The way I read this proposal, is that these options already exist
> in the libraries, they just happen to be scattered around and are hard
> to find. Putting them in one place makes it more obvious what kind of
> internal design decisions were made.  I'd have to agree that this would
> be useful in some way.

Yes, that is pretty much the intention. One place with some standards about 
what/where and how it's used.

> I agree though, that this should not affect platform or packaging
> options - those should all be made via configure - except for options
> that are overridable via defaults or configure options.

That is the intention. Only features within the library without external 
dependencies so that we can control internal behaviours.
As I said, I don't mean to get rid of, nor to replicate behaviour of, 
autoconf. It's purely within the library.

> The BACKEND_BUNDLE was probably a bad example, but the other ones are
> good - basic internal library behavior that a large majority of
> administrators would not care to change or dictate

Yes, I derailed things somewhat with that example.
The others still hold, I think.


Regards,
Sheldon