[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Tinycc-devel] autoconfiscation

From: Gregg Reynolds
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] autoconfiscation
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:13:15 -0500

On 8/26/07, Ivo <address@hidden> wrote:

> > > I forsee Checking for Fortran compiler...  etc..
> >
> > I don't know what kind of traumas you suffered in your early
> > development, but I had nothing to do with them.
> Insulting people doesn't make you look smarter.

Lighten up, Ivo.  It was a joke.

> ffmpeg's configure is not a lame non-portable config/build system. It's

I'll take your word for it, although I'm not sure what it has to do
with tinycc's config/build system.

> perfectly cross-platform. IMHO autoconf stuff is horribly broken.
FWIW, you might consider some fact-checking.  I don't know where you
got the idea AC checks for FORTRAN, etc. for C projects, for example.
That's plainly incorrect.  Maybe you haven't look at it for a while;
it's a lot better now than it was a few years ago.  Still hideous, but
it works.

Automated, portable, etc. etc. configuration mgmt is an interesting
topic, but for me at least now is not the time.  I just want tinycc to
work and I don't really care how.  I happen to know AC/AM/etc fairly
well so I'll probably give tinycc the treatment.  I'm looking for
people interested in testing, not debating the toolset; I just don't
have time for that.  AC/AM/etc may be the most hideous hairball in the
cosmos, but they work pretty well and they seem to be known and used
by many. For a small project like tcc, a big debate about config/build
systems doesn't seem worth the trouble.

Having said that, I might be persuaded to take a look at cmake
(http://www.cmake.org/HTML/Index.html) if AC is a big issue for most
people.  I've not looked into it very far, but it seems to be gaining
some traction and has fairly impressive feature set.


reply via email to

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