Re: Idea: a gui for automatic ./configure && make


On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 12:08 -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: 
> I don't think it is worth it since you'd end up having to recreate a 
> packaging system -- complete with diffs, custom configuration args, 
> installation work-arounds, et cetera as it used more wide-spread.

I second that.

> As a packages framework and package developer, I have seen numerous source 
> downloads that install to their own desired locations, overwrite files, 
> destroy configurations, have out-dated or non-standard autoconf 
> ./configure usage, etc.

And as a Linux user, I've seen that compiling a package from source is
always *not* as simple as a:

$ ./configure && make && sudo make install

IMO, if the above set of commands do the job, then why to take the
*trouble* of compiling from source? A binary package would do that for
me. :)

I (and I'm sure most other people) compile from source because I need
all binaries and libs in one particular location (for easy removal and
management) or behave in a particular manner. Both of these requirements
are meant by providing required switches to ./configure. I don't think a
GUI would help in such cases. :)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]