[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: autoconf / automake
- From: Marc Balmer <marc@...>
- Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:05:18 +0200
Am 27.10.11 21:33, schrieb Christian Liesch:
> Am 27.10.2011 16:49, schrieb Peter Pimley:
>> On 27 October 2011 13:40, Christian Liesch<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> For example to use the solaris compiler I do have to patch the
>>> Makefile in the src directory, with a correct configuration script
>>> this would not be neccessary :)
>> If you didn't want to touch the Makefile could you do "make solaris
>> CC=whatever" ?
> That is very very emotional thread. I just ask why not. And I also
> respect the reason "I do not like autotools". Me I do like and from my
> point of view it would make things easier on unix system. But if not its
> okey for me. To patch the Makefile isn't that complicate.
> I would even have worte the configure.in and Makefile.am for you. But if
> there is such a big ressistant against autotools it would not be a good
> idea I supose.
> "make solaris CC=cc" would work thanks for your suggestion.
I also *HATE* autotools, but let me add a bit that I hope is constructive.
Under BSD Unix, make (the BSD variant of make, that is) looks for
'Makefile'. The Gnu make (sometimes called gmake) looks for
'GNUmakefile' before ' Makefile'.
So whenever I write software for both the BSDs and Linux (yes, that
happens... ;) I provide a Makefile for BSD make and a GNUmakefile for
That works very well.