On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Steffen Dettmer wrote: > 2011/1/12 Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattar...@gmail.com>: > > I'm starting to think that > > automake should *really* start supporting *only* GNU make (at least > > from version 3.75 or so). > > I think also bash, gcc and most GNU tools are widely avialable. > They could be built using an old fixed automake. > But where should this end? > I'd say it ends with "require GNU make".
Let's see why (for example): [GCC] First, I wouldn't say it's "easy to build", nor that is small (on the contrary, GNU make basically consists of a single executable). Moreover, while the make program is only influential at build time, the C compiler can (e.g., through the optimizations it performs or the builtins it offers) influence all the later executions of a program -- so that it would make perfect sense for a user to require a compiler different from GCC. (A similar reasoning would IMHO hold for tools like yacc/bison and lex/flex). [GNU tools (basically coreutils + sed + awk)] Again, they're nowhere as small as make (true, they consist of small simple programs, but there are also ~ 80 of these programs!). Also, it is usually pretty simple to work around incompatibilities w.r.t. these tools (especially since the more complex of them, like awk and sed, are not used in an advanced fashion from within make recipes). The same is definitely not true for the incompatibilities among different make implementations. [GNU bash] OK, I admit this is pretty self-contained and easy to build; but then again, given the way the shell is used from make recipes, any decent almost-POSIX shell (which ./configure picks up for us, BTW) is good enough to work with. Please keep in mind that I'm no proposing to reduce portability just for the fun of it, but only if the reduction is small and the gain significant -- which *I* believe would be the case of a GNU make requirewent. > If only the MyLinux version from yesterday is supported? > What is wrong from using a ten year old u*nx machine as long as > it works? > Nothing; just install GNU make on it if you want to compile a package using the (hypotetical) automake 2.0. Seriously, is this going to be perceived as a major obstacle or an unreasonable requirement (honest question, no sarcasm)? > (ok, my has GNU Make 3.79.1 so I would be fine SCNR) > > oki, > > Steffen > Regards, Stefano
