Return-path: Received: from mail-qc0-f176.google.com ([209.85.216.176]:40125 "EHLO mail-qc0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752394AbaBDDAL convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2014 22:00:11 -0500 Received: by mail-qc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id e16so12521782qcx.21 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 19:00:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <52EF9C2E.5030202@opensuse.org> References: <1391319050-100614-1-git-send-email-crrodriguez@opensuse.org> <1391424732.4488.4.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <1391424860.4488.6.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <52EF9C2E.5030202@opensuse.org> From: Julian Calaby Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 13:59:48 +1100 Message-ID: (sfid-20140204_040017_266801_324B600F) Subject: Re: [PATCH] [iw] Make the build system automake based To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Cristian_Rodr=EDguez?= Cc: Johannes Berg , linux-wireless Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Cristian, On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Cristian Rodr?guez wrote: > El 03/02/14 07:54, escribi?: > >> On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 11:52 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: >> >>> I *might* be open to switching to something like >>> cmake >> >> [...] something *sane* like cmake [...] >> >> (FWIW, don't even argue that part about auto*, it's decidedly not sane >> to have a build system that needs roughly two dozen versions installed >> concurrently to build different software) >> >> johannes >> > > Well, unfortunately we disagree on everything. cmake is NOT sane though I > could write an equivalent in few minutes, read the book, been there, done > that.. it sucks. > > Autotools does not require two dozen versions installed to build anything, > this is a apparently an insanity found only in debian distributions. > > Looks like I am going to stop wasting keystrokes about now..people who have > similar opinions invariably do not understand the problems faced by > distributors or packagers. Opinions will always differ. Is there some way that the makefile could be improved / simplified to meet your goals / requirements without a complete automake based rewrite? I understand that custom makefiles can be a maintenance burden, but if you could describe the exact issue you're having, and maybe propose a less invasive patch, you might get a more positive response. (By "invasive", I mean increasing the build dependencies, not necessarily changing a lot of code.) Another option could be to add an automake build system in parallel with the current make based one and offer to maintain it. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/