Skip to content

support for GNU configure syntax #9565

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

support for GNU configure syntax #9565

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

cnd
Copy link
Contributor

@cnd cnd commented Sep 27, 2013

It will be useful for unix systems, some package managers and external tools that is passing / maybe looking for GNU configure syntax options.

One of related bugs: #5138

Also that could be useful in future if project will really install man pages / other stuff using those variables.

@sanxiyn
Copy link
Member

sanxiyn commented Sep 27, 2013

If we were to do this (I am not sure about that) I think we should eliminate the old syntax instead of having both old syntax and GNU syntax.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

cc me

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Sep 27, 2013

I agree that if we do this it should replace the existing options. --build, --host and --target seem like reasonble replacements for our --build-triple, --host-triples and --target-triples options. (It looks like this patch doesn't actually use these flags for anything, just accepts them?)

I'm not sure the role of the other options besides --mandir which we could support in an obvious way.

Making this change will require some automation and documentation changes too.

I guess I'm inclined to move in this direction for the sake of compatibility. Probably the way to do it is:

  • Convert to using --build, --host, and --target, leaving the current flags for temporary compatibility.
  • Wire up the others that make sense so that they do something.
  • Leave the ones that don't have any meaning for us as no-ops?
  • Update the various documentation to use the new flags.
  • Merge.
  • Update automation.
  • Remove old flags.

Anybody else have opinions?

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Compatibility is good.

@cnd
Copy link
Contributor Author

cnd commented Sep 28, 2013

@brson I'm agreed, that will be much better. Will you take this task or will wait for me? I can try to do it ~next week.

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Oct 1, 2013

@Heather you can do it.

@cnd
Copy link
Contributor Author

cnd commented Oct 2, 2013

@brson

  • where are those flags are using?
  • How can I handle compatibility with older syntax there?
  • noopt will fail if package manager will run configure --mandir=/usr/...

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Closing this temporarily to see if it un-sticks bors.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

It appears that this has ended up confusing bors, I think it's because you opened the pull request from the branch heather, but now your commits are coming from master (in your repo) instead. Not sure how github is figuring everything out, but would you mind re-opening in a new pull-request to un-stick bors? Thanks!

@cnd
Copy link
Contributor Author

cnd commented Oct 8, 2013

Yes, sorry, I usually use to break git repositories with rebasing and branch was broken so I recreated it on master on fork.

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2013
Re-created: #9760

Now, without adding `pc-linux-gnu` platform

Re-created: #9565

t will be useful for unix systems, some package managers and external tools that is passing / maybe looking for GNU configure syntax options.

One of related bugs: #5138

Also that could be useful in future if project will really install man pages / other stuff using those variables.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants