On Mon, Nov 11, 2002, David A. Desrosiers wrote: > Fatal errors without graceful checking are just ugly, and can lead > to more bug reports than we probably care to see.
I resent the allegation that the viewer's configure script doesn't do any "graceful checking"; it checks for two different build environments (prc-tools 0.6.0beta and prc-tools 2.x), the use of different SDKs, ZLib source package, etc. Neither are errors reported by the viewer's configure script "fatal"; creating an "empty" Makefile would be the cause of more bug reports than any error report from a configure script. If a user doesn't tell the top configure script that the viewer shouldn't be built then the configuration will "halt" if the tools to build the viewer aren't available; the viewer's configure script can't tell the top configure script that the viewer can't be built. If the user still attempts to run 'make' after the "failed" configuration, he better not complain about 'make' failing because he will only make a fool of himself... > Using long arcane (easy to misspell) options probably aren't the > best choice for usability. And that's why the default is to build everything, i.e. you only have to check the name of the options when you want to turn something off (or change some feature.) /Mike _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
