Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:57:59 +0000 From: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD equivalents of autoconf, automake, etc. Message-ID: <20041220145758.GA26389@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNAEMKEPAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <20041217235243.GA89288@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNAEMKEPAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 01:14:48AM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: : WHY? : ------8<------ : : You don't need an install script. Whomever is building the RPM : or whomever is creating the FreeBSD port has their own ideas of : where they want things to be installed and has no interest in : interference from you. : : Keep it Simple Stupid. A Makefile that has options settible : by editing with a text editor, and a nice readme file that tells : what all the settible options are, is infinitely superior than : all the configure crap. That is all that the RPM and ports : creators want from you. And the end users don't even want to : compile your stuff in the first place, let alone see it's : install script. For example, since Linux and FreeBSD have different device names for the serial port. I'd like to be able to test from my FreeBSD box, but will deploy to Linux. I don't know if system header files are the same, but I need to be able to find them on both systems. jm -- I love feminist movements, especially when I'm walking behind them.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041220145758.GA26389>