[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: doc dirs?
From: |
Russ Allbery |
Subject: |
Re: doc dirs? |
Date: |
19 Jun 2001 14:39:50 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands) |
Guido Draheim <address@hidden> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Wouldn't some sort of general facility for adding a new *dir switch for
>> a given package be better than adding a bunch of new options that very
>> few packages will use (and making --help even longer)? If the worry is
>> that programs will use inconsistent switch names, we can always put a
>> list of recommendations into the manual.
> just a few thoughts:
> a) the helpscreen lists things like sysconfdir or infodir or sharedstatedir
> but many packages don't use these. They are just confusing, nothing else.
> Possibly just there so they can propagate to sub-configures...
Wholeheartedly agreed; they should go away too unless they're actually
used. It's really annoying that ./configure --help prints out more than a
screen of output when frequently for a trivial package only two or three
of those switches actually do anything at all.
> b) I see packages to put dirpath-settables as --with-htmldir options, or
> possibly with a different name, e.g. --with-html-dir. It is inconsistent
> and it should be stopped. We want dist-makers to be able to call all
> the ac' configures with a predefined option-set and have unused ignored.
I think those packages that care should use --htmldir; I think that all
switches ending in *dir should be reserved for such things and that there
should be an interface similar to that for --enable and --with switches
for setting up such switches.
And there definitely should be a list of standard switches and a strong
recommendation that packages use one of the standard names rather than
making up their own.
> c) propagate with-options to sub-configure, silently doing it even for
> unknown options, same with the current set of dirpaths, propagate them,
> even if toplevel doesn't used them. nice thing, isn't it. Align the
> functionality of both. Kinda AC_ARG_DIR to be along AC_ARG_WITH (and
> AC_ARG_VAR)? Looks easy, but probably isn't...
Exactly.
> d) combine a/c with an underlying fhs/gcs scheme for knownpaths,
> AC_USE_DIR(synconf sharedstate), don't add it to local subst/help
> by default, but use the knownpath from the standards if a USE_DIR
> is seen. b/c means to accept every --*dir silently for sub-configures.
I didn't quite follow that.
--
Russ Allbery (address@hidden) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
- doc dirs?, RĂ¼diger Kuhlmann, 2001/06/18
- Re: doc dirs?, Russ Allbery, 2001/06/18
- Re: doc dirs?, Guido Draheim, 2001/06/19
- Re: doc dirs?,
Russ Allbery <=
- Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?, RĂ¼diger Kuhlmann, 2001/06/19
- Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Earnie Boyd, 2001/06/20
- Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Guido Draheim, 2001/06/20
- Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Ralf Corsepius, 2001/06/20
- Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Guido Draheim, 2001/06/20
- Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/06/21
- Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?], Peter Eisentraut, 2001/06/21
- $docprefix [Re: Default values for infodir and mandir [WAS: Re: [autoconf] doc dirs?]], Guido Draheim, 2001/06/22
Re: doc dirs?, Guido Draheim, 2001/06/19