RE: installation convention (include & libs)

[Paul Bleisch <PBleisch@...>]

The .generic makefile and config file could be made to be
the same as the current setup, but my fear is that the
build becomes reliant on either a) external tools (automake
and autoconf) or b) becomes reliant on using a makefile to
build the system.

There is some documentation somewhere (lua manual, readme or
something) that basically says "the lib source is in here",
"the client source is in here", "the example source is in 
here".  Because of this, I can open up my handy little project
tool that is not "make" based and plop all of the .c files 
in the libs source directory, hit build, and things work.

If the system becomes reliant on make, this becomes more and
more difficult to do.

Paul


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Watson [mailto:alan@xaratanga.astrosmo.unam.mx]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 12:14 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: installation convention (include & libs)
> 
> 
> > Even with the 
> > .generic files things can go wrong.  
> 
> How does having the .generic files differ from the current
> situation?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Alan
> -- 
> Dr Alan Watson
> Instituto de Astronomía UNAM
>