Originally Posted by orgcandman
I don't understand what we're discussing? I merely thought I was expressing those things required to use autotools? Just as it's true that the auto-generated parser code doesn't always work correctly (think - version differences for flex/bison, although they are probably much rarer), the generated ./configure doesn't always work correctly (I had problems recently with the ircd-seven ./configure on my ubuntu system). In those cases, without the complete package we cannot even hope to build the system. My point remains valid - if a project depends on autotools, it depends on autotools, and everything that autotools depends on.
I'm not saying that this is a BAD or GOOD thing (which implies value).
It's merely a fact.
Yes, this is obviously an argument about nothing. Developer vs. end-user requirements; you're discussing one, I'm discussing the other.
Even with my own projects, I have to autoreconf
pretty much every time I check out a repo that has a configure
generated using another auto
* version. And yes, that's just to build something that already builds somewhere else. Somehow make dist
magically takes care of that for the archive, however.