[Israel.pm] Installer for a Perl and Web Meta Language based program.

Mikhael Goikhman migo at homemail.com
Wed Apr 14 17:04:13 PDT 2004


On 15 Apr 2004 02:23:47 +0300, Gaal Yahas wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 10:26:27PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> > Many people write their own custom build systems, however they can't be
> > as universal as autoconf/automake, without spending the same number of
> > years on their development. And I don't completely satisfied with
> > auto-tools either. At least both automake tools and now autoconf tools
> > are mostly written in Perl. :)
> 
> Who cares what they're written in. They suck spectacularly in terms of
> the hoops you must go through to make them work. Of course, they still
> do the job most of the time, which is why they're still used. But come
> on, you don't *like* them, do you?

I like their power.

Writting Makefile.am files is easy once you get the idea.

Writting configure.in/configure.ac is an art, you should know shell
scripting and m4. I know portable /bin/sh scripting and m4.

Typing "./configure; make; make install" is a piece of cake for users.
Typing "make dist", "make distcheck" and similar is a piece of cake for
developers.

In the next lecture (no idea whether Gabor scheduled it already or not)
I will mention my project that is going to be autoconf'iscated yet.
This is a web-based app, so there is no usual bindir, mandir, datadir;
there is cgi, perl library, conf dir, run-time dir (cache), html-media
dir (images), non-html dir (run time templates). And I will still use
autoconf/automake, because these are good/easy for me and users. :-)

Regards,
Mikhael.

-- 
perl -e 'print+chr(64+hex)for+split//,d9b815c07f9b8d1e'



More information about the Perl mailing list