Es schrieb "Mark D. Roth": > > On Thu May 16 05:59 2002 -0400, Thomas E. Dickey wrote: > > aclocal has good intentions, poor design. > > I don't really understand why everyone says that like there's nothing > we can do about it. If the design is poor and inconvenient, let's fix > it! That is why it's called "software", after all. :) > > > there's nothing to stop - but my point: the given approach makes it less > > likely that someone will be able to easily get the macros since they're > > in a site-specific somewhere-else. I've seen far too many crappy packages > > built with the automake scheme where I cannot find the associated macros. > > I'm not sure that I agree that having a site macro directory makes it > any more likely for developers to screw things up. However, even if > that is the case, we can have autoconf cache any macros that get used > in the aclocal.m4 file, just like aclocal does. That way you still > get a copy of all of the necessary macros as part of the distributed > package, but it happens automatically and without the need to install > a seperate package. Would that address this objection? >
HINT: there is an "acinclude" tool in the ac-archive.sf.net distribution, it will create an acinclude.m4 file from a set of macro-holder dirs... :-) -- guido http://ac-archive.sf.net
