William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
My gut says if we cannot solve this trivial problem over the course of
three+
months due to a utter lack of competency in autoconf (and lack of time by
the small handful who understand it), perhaps the project should consider
alternatives to autoconf as we start looking down the road at APR 2.0.0?
Does anyone have any positive experiences with other configuration and
feature
detection tools?
We (stdcxx) have been using our own very simple yet quite powerful
autoconfiguration infrastructure. It's not as efficient as autoconf
but it's easier to understand and work with, and the inefficiency
could easily be dealt with.
The whole thing is only about 350 lines of shell script embedded in
just one GNU makefile, with the configuration tests stored separately
as plain C/C++ source and/or shell scripts:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stdcxx/trunk/etc/config/GNUmakefile.cfg
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stdcxx/trunk/etc/config/src/
The basic types of config tests the infrastructure can do:
compile only
compile, link and run
compile, link, run, and collect output
compile and link a library
compile and link with an object or library
From what I understand, autoconf doesn't do the last three. The
downside is that there is no libtool.
Martin
