Re: Kaffe and HP-UX 10.20 (fwd)

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Tim Wilkinson (tim@transvirtual.com)
Date: Tue Nov 10 1998 - 17:10:17 EST


Okay, if libtool is *only* necessary for developers and not necessary for people who
want to compiled Kaffe out of the box then I'd be prepared to see it merged into the
sources (experimentally at least).

As for automake - you sound somewhat skeptical Godmar :) I always though the
Makefile.in was suppose to simplify the generation of the Makefile but apparently we
can simplify the generation of the files to simplify the generations of the Makefiles
- some people have too much time on their hands :)

My suggestion would be to make a branch and try rewriting the configuration stuff then
we can all see if it's useful or not.

Cheers
Tim

Godmar Back wrote:

> Alexandre can probably answer that question better than I can,
> but keep in mind that these tools are only needed for developers
> wanting to make changes to the configuration: they're not required
> to ./configure kaffe. Correct?
>
> >
> > I recall the 'libtool' stuff coming up before - so I typed it at my Redhat linux
> > prompt and it turns out that it's not installed here and, I suspect, not
> > installed in other places either.
> >
> > Now if we want to use libtool I'd like it to be used only where it's present, and
> > if not for things to still work (is this asking too much?).
> >
> > As for automake, what exactly does this buy us (it's been a *long* time since
> > I looked at automake)?
> >
>
> It generates the Makefile.in's from some (supposedly?) simpler .am files.
>
> No really, I'm open to be convinced.
>
> - Godmar

--
  Tim Wilkinson                         Tel:     +1 510 704 1660
  Transvirtual Technologies, Inc.,      Fax:     +1 510 704 1893
  Berkeley, CA, USA.                    Email:   tim@transvirtual.com


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:02 EDT