Re: A release with LIBOBJDIR?

[Stepan Kasal]

Hello,

On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 09:28:53PM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "SK" == Stepan Kasal <address@hidden> writes:
>  SK> But if we release versions with LIBOBJDIR, we will be bounded to
>  SK> support it in future releases, even in case that it will become
>  SK> redundant.
> 
> Let's worry when we get there.

OK, I'll raise this issue when we get close to Autoconf 2.60.

> The need is to split required sources/objects into groups, for
> instance to create different libraries.  Using multiple
> directories is just one way to do it.

Another need is to split the sources to multiple directories, to make
the tree more maintainable.

> The plan discussed when LIBOBJDIR was introduced was to have
> multiple LIBOBJS-like variables (and hence multiple LIBOBJDIR
> variables),

I remember the discussion, but I always thought the tone was: ``well, this
would require multiple LIBOBJDIR-like variables, so think twice''.

I was scared by the idea of multitude of magic variables; thank you for
explaining me your view.

Alexandre, you showed me that my proposal needs more thought, thanks.
Let's put it off for now,
        Stepan,