From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: trunk r115472: Make 'configure' work out-of-the-box on Solaris. Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:07:01 +0900 Message-ID: <87bo0l1p2y.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <52A941D3.4020607@cs.ucla.edu> <52A98D60.9080709@gmx.at> <83d2l26npp.fsf@gnu.org> <52A9FC38.9010603@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1386900446 560 80.91.229.3 (13 Dec 2013 02:07:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 02:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 13 03:07:31 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VrIA6-0000AH-Q4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 03:07:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39558 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrIA6-0001cB-8w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 21:07:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39253) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrI9w-0001PR-0k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 21:07:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrI9o-0007cr-Mo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 21:07:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:40184) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrI9g-0007Zc-Aw; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 21:07:04 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B36A9708F3; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:07:02 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F3C2A1A25CF; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:07:01 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <52A9FC38.9010603@gmx.at> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 2a0f42961ed4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:166358 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: > When I want to check whether a feature works with the GTK or Lucid > build, I have to reconfigure in between. Aside from multiple branches, which are a PITA if conceptually they're supposed to be identical source IMO, surely Emacs uses the wonderful support Make has for VPATH aka configure --srcdir builds? Have a GTK blddir, a Lucid blddir, etc for any that you regularly build. After doing that once, just "make" should win (or perhaps an occasional "make bootstrap"). > Still it would be great if I didn't have to care about a missing image > library ... This is nearly trivial to support, except that it would be bad if other users were surprised by the absence of features they expect due to a lack of some *-devel.rpm. The UI aspect isn't that hard, but I can't post code because it would be based on XEmacs code of provenance unknown to me, and anyway it suits of mode of configuration unlike that of GNU Emacs. If it *can* be user-optional at configure time it *is* optional, with --enable-FEATURE={no|auto|yes}, where "auto" means "use it if you can find it and it's usable", and "yes" means "error if you can't find a usable library and header". GNU Emacs might prefer a single --enable-missing-features configure option, with "no" meaning you get a configure error when a standard feature is missing. Preferably attempting to continue configuration of all features, collecting "missing feature" errors to report at the end of the run (which of course finishes with a fatal error), and "yes" meaning you get a warning but configure continues and produces a buildable tree (as far as configure knows, of course). Either way, you could add support for it feature by feature without disturbing current users just by defaulting --enable-missing-features to "no", or all the --enable-FEATURE options to "yes".