[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: autotools & prayertime
- To: Development Discussions <developer at arabeyes dot org>
- Subject: Re: autotools & prayertime
- From: Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:28:53 -0800 (PST)
--- Behdad Esfahbod <behdad at bamdad dot org> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Nadim Shaikli wrote:
> > I'm on a SUN machine using solaris, so I'm not sure if this is a
> > portability issue or what, but here is a minimal description.
> > $ make -f Makefile.cvs
> > set -x
> > aclocal
> > aclocal: configure.in: 9: macro `AM_PROG_LIBTOOL' not found in library
> > make: *** [all] Error 1
> Do you have libtool installed?? Do "locate libtool.m4". Put
> libtool.m4 somewhere accessable.
I do; Samy has been kind enough to look more closely at the files and
has something that is a great deal more stream-lined - an email has been
sent to get Thamer OK to commit it.
> Forcing a configure is Gnome's habbit. I don't like that.
> Moreover, using Makefile.cvs is KDE's habbit. I don't like that
> too. ;-). As simple bootstrap.sh or autogen.sh does the job.
Well a Makefile.cvs gives you more flexibility to add more 'features'
and options - like 'make -f Makefile.cvs reallyClean' :-)
> > 2. Add a 'clean' option to the Makefile.cvs so that it goes back to the
> > pristine condition things were in before running 'make -f
> When you have your Makefile out of configure, you can do
> make maintainer-clean.
That doesn't clean everything, but its a start. No worries, we'll add
our own directives and cleaners :-)
> > 3. All projects that incorporate autotools (and all are going in that
> > direction), then the projects should put all its source files in
> > a ./src directory and the documentations in ./doc, etc.
> Are you talking politically, ideally, ..? ;)
Never politically :-) I think the dir would look cleaner and make more
sense if files were put in more appropriate places. I think ./src, ./lib
and ./doc are standard.
> > Using -- autoconf-2.57, automake-1.7.9, libtool-1.5
> > BTW: on linux I have no issues; the above 3 points would be nice to see.
> > I also don't see 'fribidi' for instance using "libtoolize", is our
> > process over-complicated compared to their 'bootstrap' ?
> libtoolize is something like autoscan. It should be run just
> once at the very beginning.
Sounds like I have lots to read and follow-up on.
Thanks & Salam.
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.