Re: RFC: ./configure or ./config.status --clean

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Eisentraut <address@hidden> writes:

Peter> Akim Demaille writes:
>> And, as far as Automake goes, I don't think I'm making things worse
>> to its non-users.  Nothing changes for them.

Peter> Possibly true, but try to keep a clean separation between
Peter> Autoconf and Automake.  Autoconf shouldn't have to know about
Peter> removing files and such things.  Just provide a list of files
Peter> that you generate and then the makefile author/generator can
Peter> decide what to do with it.

I think we are in real disagreement here.  I suppose it is because you
are not the one who is pointed at when something is not appreciated in
Autoconf, such as new files that need to be manually added to
DISTCLEANFILES.

What I'm doing now is buying my freedom.  The freedom to extend
Autoconf without 1. requiring from the rest of the world that they
adjust their distclean rules, 2. requiring that Automake folks release
a newer Automake etc., not to mention that it needs 1. writing
documentation, 2. telling the people to read it.

Something like --clean makes it transparent to everyone.