Re: Emacs vista build failures

[Johannes Weiner]

Hi,

Richard M Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     > My question concerns looking beyond X to the free software community
>     > as a whole.  Has there been a broader move towords supporting the GNU
>     > configure and build specs?
>
>     Maybe you heard the term `autohell' once?
>
> Actually no.  It seems to be a criticism of something.
> Perhaps Autoconf, or perhaps not -- I have no way to tell.

autoconf, automake, and so on.  Actually, I heard people referring to
the whole generation of configure scripts and Makefiles as `autohell'.

Yes, it's ovbiously a criticism.

> If you are talking about Autoconf, then you've misunderstood what this
> issue is about.  It is not about using Autoconf.  It is about
> implementing the interface specified in the GNU Coding Standards.
> Let's please stick to the topic.

Which means using the auto tools, be realistic.  Who writes configure
scripts manually?

I have no interest in discussing theory when we have so much reality
going on.

People are not only moving away from the interface itself but also from
the default tools to generate them, because they are still too complex
to use.

The interface difference is worked around by the package maintainers,
they are prepared to support different building mechanisms.

        Hannes