Re: [HACKERS] Configure problem, redux (was Re: TCL installation troubles)

On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Tom Lane wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >> Namely: I think we have gotten much too willing to use configure to
> >> rewrite subsidiary files all over the distribution, rather than ensuring
> >> that the configuration decisions are expressed in a central place.
>
> > I disagree here. If people want to twiddle, they can after configure.
> > People would much rather spell params to configure, rather than to edit
> > Makefiles.
>
> I agree with you, up to a point. What happens if configure makes the
> wrong choice for a given system? For a person not familiar with
> autoconf (which is most people) fixing its output is likely to be easier
> than trying to fix the script.

Huh? Can you give an example of a Makefile that configure
modifies that could pose a problem?

Off the top of my head, the only stuff that configure modifies is
stuff like backend/port/Makefile, to add in OS-missing functions...for the
most part, that should be *all* that configure modifies...and, ya, we
could move that into Makefile.global...

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org