> On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 01:10:01PM -0800, Bob > Palowoda wrote: > > > I often wondered what the meaning of porting meant > when it > > comes to 'autoconf'. Maybe an example to the gates > of hell. > > Yes. As often as not, porting software these days > includes both the > traditional removal of platform- or OS-specific > assumptions and now > the new component of working around the braindead > insistence of > autoconf and especially libtool that they know how to > deal with your > platform when in fact they usually do the exact wrong > thing. > > That said, I like what Eric's put together here; it > seems like > essentially a human-readable version of the metadata > that ports > archives contain. The knowledge-sharing aspect is > commendable; this > can in effect serve as a repository of information > about the very > kinds of workarounds I referred to above.
Remember I said "the gates of hell" and you brought up libtool. And yes I like what Eric documented I wouldn't spend the time reading it if I didn't. But you bring up some interesting points. Is libtool used for the OpenSolaris build process and worth an entry in the Collaborative porting encyclopedia experiment? Or is libtool only important to the Companion CD and build tools not to Solaris developers in general, not worth mentioning until it becomes stable on the Solaris platform. ---Bob -- This messages posted from opensolaris.org
