[PD-dev] autotools for pd-devel

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at eds.org
Sat Mar 28 17:36:17 CET 2009


I don't think there needs to be many levels, so hopefully it won't be  
too recursive.  I think we should encourage flatness for the sake of  
simplicity, etc. Something like this:

Pd-extended build
while section builds (pd, externals, etc)
individual lib builds (zexy, cyclone, etc.)

.hc


On Mar 27, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Bryan Jurish wrote:

> moin Hans, moin all,
>
> yes!  (that is: yes, autotools are weird; yes, autotools are not so  
> bad;
> yes, I think they could be used for the whole build system; and yes,  
> I'm
> interested)  One thing to watch out for with big recursive auotools
> projects would be outrageous costs for re-generating (autoreconf) rsp.
> re-configuring (./configure) the whole build tree.
>
> wow... who'd've thunk jury duty could be so productive?
>
> marmosets,
> 	Bryan
>
> On 2009-03-27 13:48:27, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at eds.org>  
> appears to
> have written:
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> I had to do jury duty on Wednesday, and they had free wifi while we
>> waited, so for some reason that inspired me to try writing a complete
>> autotools build system for Pd-devel.  It builds Pd now, but there are
>> some issues with the sound APIs that need to be sorted out.
>>
>> I would appreciate feedback from anyone who is interested.  After  
>> this
>> experience, I am thinking that autotools are weird, but not so  
>> bad.  I
>> think that we should use them for the whole build system.
>
> -- 
> Bryan Jurish                           "There is *always* one more  
> bug."
> jurish at ling.uni-potsdam.de      -Lubarsky's Law of Cybernetic  
> Entomology



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is  
publicity.          - Bill Moyers






More information about the Pd-dev mailing list