[MPlayer-dev-eng] autoconf

[Paul Jarc]

D Richard Felker III <dalias at aerifal.cx> wrote:
> If our script is buggy we'll fix the bugs. Yes, every once in a while
> someone commits dumb bash2-specific code to it, but the same mistake
> can be made with configure.in! Just drink the cola, fix it, and move
> along.
>
> If there are missing features in our script, feel free to add them.

Of course it's possible to do all that, but with
automatically-generated scripts, you get these things with less
manual effort.  That's my point.  Humans are free to work on
interesting problems instead of plodding through code that programs
are smart enough to handle.

>> So this takes us back to "someone must volunteer to do the work".  I'm
>> considering it.
>
> NO! This is a reason it should not be done, since it's not a one-time
> thing,

I'm aware of that.

> but something the developers have to update every time they add new
> optional features!!

Aren't they able to learn?  If someone volunteers to do the initial
work and stay around to provide hand-holding when needed, would they
still refuse to learn?

>> there are some projects that store the autoconf-generated files in
>> CVS.
>
> This still means any developer who wants to update the configure
> script must have the right version of autoconf installed (bad),

It's not so bad, especially if all autoconf-related changes end up
being done by just one person.  Even if it happens that one person
needs to have different versions installed for different projects, you
can install different versions with different prefixes so they don't
collide.

> and it pollutes the CVS logs immensely since autoconf insists on
> hard coding line numbers all over the generated file, making it so
> even a small modification alters the entire file.

True.


paul