On Jul 19, 2016, at 8:19 AM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> wrote:
> This is one of the problems with projects that roll their own nonstandard 
> configure scripts and Makefiles -- they don't work the way anybody unfamiliar 
> with that project expects. Developers would do well to adopt standard 
> configure script and Makefiles made with autotools since everyone already 
> knows how they work and using standardized well-tested tools like autotools 
> avoids problems project developers may not even know exist.

Since most things use autotools, it does (usually) make things easier for us - 
but autotools is not great.

I largely agree with phk 
(https://www.varnish-cache.org/docs/2.1/phk/autocrap.html).

And also 
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/83pnv/autotools_sucks_that_is_all/c085x1d
 -
"Are you seriously suggesting that using M4 to metaprogram a shell script to 
metaprogram C source code to test for language features in order to metaprogram 
the final Makefile to build the program in your target language isn't entirely 
optimal?"


In any event, part of the whole point of MacPorts is that the maintainer is the 
only one who has to figure out how to build the project, and after encoding 
that knowledge into a Portfile, we all benefit.
-- 
Daniel J. Luke



_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev

Reply via email to