[PD-dev] pd-extended build-system

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>  
> As for the config thing, it could work like you proposed, but then I  
> think we might end up rewriting autoconf, which would be a waste of  
> time.  I think that if there is autoconf functionality needed, then I  
> think we should use autoconf.   I don't think it would be so hard to  

yes of course. i am a happy user of autoconf (most of the time at, 
least)  and i don't want to abandon it.
i was rather thinking of a generic way how to access a 
configuration-system (such as autoconf) via the big mother-Makefile.

obviously i have made a typo when grabbing for "configure" in your 
Makefile and therefore (wrongly) thought that it is never used...

> do, but it would take a fair amount of coordination.  As for using  
> scons, I am uncomfortable using pre-1.0 software for something as  
> mundane as the build system.  Let's keep the build system stable, since  

my wording...
i personally don't want to switch to SCons (for whatever reasons), but 
there are devs who use (and maintain) this build-system and those should 
be able to re-use it.
(i remember there was a thread on calling SCons from make - and iirc 
ideas differed a lot...)

mfg.asdr.
IOhannes