Re: Creating "Additional" makefiles

[Wim Oudshoorn]

> > NOTE: although I'd love to be able to avoid using
> > autoconf/configure to set up some of these things,
> > the fact that developers and users are going
> > to have to have certain 3rd party libraries installed
> > means that we've got to be able to ensure that they're there,
> > and configure accordingly.
>
> Yes - you certainly need to use autoconf/configure in the configuration
> steps of your frameworks to detect and locate the required external
> libraries.


Looking at it from a highlevel, there seem two issues here:

A)  Detecting if 3rd party librairies are installed
B)  Configuring accordingly

What does autoconf/configure add here?

A.1)  Upfront detecting of missing libraries
B.1)  Figuring out where the libraries are installed.

What is the problem if you do not use autoconf/configure?

A.2)  You detect at link time that the libraries can not be found
B.2)  If libraries are not installed in a default place they will
    not be found.

Personally I find A.2 not a problem, so for me the only advantage
will be point B.1 (and avoiding B.2).

If indeed B is the only reason to use autoconf/configure, could it not
be made in such a way that it is not compulsory to run use it?
Just add in a readme file instructions like to change the makefile
in a few specific places.


Wim Oudshoorn.

P.S.: I was ranting against autoconf/configure just last week.
      was this the reason for you'r question about avoiding autoconf?
      It is not that I hate it, just that it, in my experience, is prone
      to fail and almost impossible to work around if it fails.