[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xougen] FW: imake status in Xouvert

From: >> G-LiTe /
Subject: Re: [xougen] FW: imake status in Xouvert
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 15:10:36 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030902 Mozilla Thunderbird/0.2a

Eric Anholt wrote:

I have yet to hear an argument of what autotools will do better than
imake in the case of a project that is basically XFree86.  Just using
the term "flexibility," I have no idea what you're referring to.  Again,
a summary of the current imake build system is that it exists, is fast,
is very portable, and is relatively easy to maintain (IMO).  Oh, and
from the perspective of a package maintainer it has fewer dependencies
(perl, which I believe is not true of current CVS, compared to autotools
which would require automake, autoconf, libtool, and gmake at least)
That is only to the developer unless the end user or packager wants to create the configure scripts himself. (Or some of the helper scripts in Xouvert's source package are symlinks or not included at all, which is a bad idea anyways) Even then, most of the time it'll only matter to developers creating new options or modules which means including options and checks to the configure script.
Still, I agree, autotools has not been proven any better than imake so far.
> G-LiTe /

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]