Re: Using headers that install into a subdir

On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 07:16:50PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Jeff Bailey <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > I just don't want to go through and figure out the best automake way to
> > accommodate this just to find out that you wanted to get rid of it
> > anyway.
> 
> Remind me just why we want automake at all?
> 
> Perhaps it isn't the best thing for large projects like this with very
> complex makefiles.

I would say the opposite.  The larger the project, the more you can profit
from it.  We get all the common benefits (proper dist and distcheck targets,
a lot of functionality readily available, like texinfo rules).

One thing is that the auto* tools come with a framework to write tests. 

Another thing is that we can provide easy to use templates for people to
copy in their Hurd server packages.

Another is that we can probably organize the source tree better in the long
run, because we don't hit the limits and assumptions that are currently
coded in the makerules (ie, flat directory structure, one type of software
per directory).

And of course everybody knows how to use automake, but only you know the
Hurd makefiles (and only Roland _wrote_ make ;)

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    [email protected]
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
[email protected]
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/