Re: R.I.P., Configure?

[Ilya Zakharevich <ilya@math.ohio-state.edu>]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 02:19:28PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> directories. Also there is no direct support for putting object files in a 
> separate directory, which is a very nice feature for pari testers, since
> we can make all the build for all the archs and the dbg versions with 
> the same source tree.

Maybe be off topic, but the standard way to fight such restrictions is
ln-tree.  This is a simple script (or a Perl one-liner) which makes a
link-copy of a distribution (in the copy the directories are real, all
the rest is symlinks).  As far as a distribution contains no
self-modifying files, this is a cheap way to compile for different
architectures.

> 3) We can use autoconf, but it is a bit of works to rewrite the Makefile.SH
> and the benefit are not clear.  One of the problem is the #define names
> that do not match. PARI use USE_GETRUSAGE, autoconf HAVE_GETRUSAGE

Given 6 or 7 defines PARI uses, this would be peanuts.

But personally, I see no advantage in switching to such a badly
designed tool as configure; even though the current scheme is
home-grown, it is/looks much more robust than configure.

Ilya