Re: [Bug-apl] Bug: ./configure --without-libapl still wants to compile library

[Alexey Veretennikov]

Hi,

I assume --without-libapl should be the same as --with-libapl=no, as it
logically follows.

I guess there is a bug either in the build system or in
autoconf/automake tools. I've never written scripts for them so I can't
judge; but all my previous experience building software with ./configure
script says what --without-PACKAGE actually means build _without_
mentioned package.

To me it is a sensitive subject, since because of this the build process
on my ARM HPC is more than 24 hours already.

Juergen Sauermann <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Alexey,
>
> first of all, --without-libapl is not a valid ./configure option, and there 
> is no mentioning
> of --without-libapl in README-2-configure.
>
> Not building libapl is the default, so instead of saying --without-libapl you 
> should simply not say
> --with-libapl.
>
> The --without-PACKAGE description in configure --help comes from the standard 
> autoconf help
> and relates to packages being used and not to packages being produced (like 
> libapl).
>
> As a matter of fact, according to ./configure --help, --without-libapl is the 
> same as --with-libapl=no.
> Now, --with-libapl does not have (resp. ignores) any arguments, which makes 
> --with-libapl=no
> the same as --with-libapl, which is what you see.
>
> /// Jürgen
>
> On 12/26/2016 09:09 PM, Alexey Veretennikov wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
> It seems what even if I set
>
> ./configure --without-libapl
>
> the configure scripts still reports
>
> checking if we want to build libapl.so... yes
>
>
>

-- 
Br,
/Alexey