On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:06:32PM -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:

> Currently there are thousands of packages that do produce useful software on 
> platforms such as Linux or *BSD for that matter. It really is as easy as 
> saying, "make install", and have no compilation errors, a clean binary 
> produced.
> 
> The OpenSolaris community should make an effort to modify the gnu tools used 
> for much of that software (autoconf, automake, et al).
> 
> No matter what the arguments are, or what environment is needed to be setup, 
> this should be done in the configure.in and other configuration files so that 
> it is as simple as "make install".

To the extent that this is true on any platform (which is not nearly
as much as you might think), I agree that it should be true on
Solaris, and I'm sure the other OpenSolaris distribution vendors will
agree that it's a desirable property for their products.  Fixing
autotools and their consumers would be a huge win.  Of course, so
would giving autotools a nice long soak in a napalm bath.

> Since much of the software uses /usr/local, that would only put
> OpenSolaris in better alignment, IMO. We'll probably disagree on
> this, and that's fine.

It seems so.

> Even much of the GNU configurations include changes for win32, and
> READMEs exist for those folks. Please at least consider some type of
> effort to create READMEs for those projects (at minimum), so that
> the average person can understand whey they can't just, "make
> install", and get usable results.

Again, this points to the correct approach - fixing the upstream
software to understand Solaris and other OpenSolaris-based systems.
If fixing a particular component is impossible or impractical,
documenting the requirements to get a working set of binaries is the
next best thing.

-- 
Keith M Wesolowski              "Sir, we're surrounded!" 
Solaris Kernel Team             "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" 

Reply via email to