Dear Gambitizers,
Does anyone use Autoconf? One of the supposed advantages of compiling Scheme->C is that the C is portable and therefore "compilable" by anyone with a C compiler.
Autoconf seems to be the most familiar routine (I mean typing ./configure && make && make install), so it would be good to know how to set up such a distribution. For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
I realize this raises some questions about linking with Gambit, so I'm a little confused.
Does anyone have a schema for using Autoconf that I could see?
Thanks, Joel
Afficher les réponses par date
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 01:05:48PM -0400, Joel J. Adamson wrote :
Dear Gambitizers,
Hi,
Autoconf seems to be the most familiar routine (I mean typing ./configure && make && make install), so it would be good to know how to set up such a distribution. For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
It is famous, well spread, but bad. The autotools are everything but friendly, and there are other tools that can be much better, though they are still seldom used.
Scons, aap, cmake, makepp...
P!
Adrien Pierard pierarda@iro.umontreal.ca writes:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 01:05:48PM -0400, Joel J. Adamson wrote :
Dear Gambitizers,
Hi,
Autoconf seems to be the most familiar routine (I mean typing ./configure && make && make install), so it would be good to know how to set up such a distribution. For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
It is famous, well spread, but bad.
Can you elaborate? I'm sure I can find vigorous rancor directed at any commonly used device if I look on the internet. What are your opinions?
The autotools are everything but friendly, and there are other tools that can be much better, though they are still seldom used.
Scons, aap, cmake, makepp...
Yes, my experience with scons was how annoying it was to try to install that in order to build what I really wanted (xmms2). I'd like to avoid that as my project serves the dual purpose of introducing people to free-and-open-source software and providing them with a useful tool. I'd like to avoid perpetuating any stereotypes, as preposterous as they are.
The whole point of using autoconf would be to use something almost everybody already has. Of course, if I could deliver it without people using anything external, that would be best.
Joel
Joel J. Adamson wrote:
For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
I realize this raises some questions about linking with Gambit, so I'm a little confused.
You might just do as Gambit does: use the gsc-cc-o script for compiling the C code. This should already contain all the necessary info Gambit got out of autoconf (at least the info relevant to compiling the Gambit C files).
Christian.
Christian Jaeger christian@pflanze.mine.nu writes:
Joel J. Adamson wrote:
For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
I realize this raises some questions about linking with Gambit, so I'm a little confused.
You might just do as Gambit does: use the gsc-cc-o script for compiling the C code. This should already contain all the necessary info Gambit got out of autoconf (at least the info relevant to compiling the Gambit C files).
I'm a little confused (again) about what you mean. Are you suggesting someone installing the software use gsc-cc-o? I will take a look at it, as I obviously need to figure out what it does.
Thanks, Joel
Joel J. Adamson wrote:
Dear Gambitizers,
Does anyone use Autoconf? One of the supposed advantages of compiling Scheme->C is that the C is portable and therefore "compilable" by anyone with a C compiler.
Autoconf seems to be the most familiar routine (I mean typing ./configure && make && make install), so it would be good to know how to set up such a distribution. For example, "make dist" would compile scheme modules in such a way that all the work left is for the C compiler.
I realize this raises some questions about linking with Gambit, so I'm a little confused.
Does anyone have a schema for using Autoconf that I could see?
I don't recommend using autoconf. It's especially bad when you need to do cross-compiling where the original build environment differs from the environment that you want to deploy into.
In addition, you can just *forget* Windows.
I really recommend scons. It has almost as much magic as autoconf, and it's a *lot* friendlier. It also handles Windows as well as cross-compiling much better.
The downside, of course, is that it requires Python if you are going to build from scratch.
-a