Subject: Re: Determining the "maximum length of command line argument"
To: Martin Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net>
From: Ron Roskens <roskens@elfin.net>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 01/24/2004 12:06:39
* Martin Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net> [2004-01-24 07:56:30 +0100]:

> On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:05PM -0600, Ron Roskens wrote:
> > * Martin Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net> [2004-01-24 00:05:34 +0100]:
> > > (...)
> > > Maybe there should be a global cache in pkgsrc for configure run results.
> > > That way it wouldn't be required to set at sometime in advance, yet configure
> > > runs over time would add the pieces missing.
> > 
> > You can do this already. Set the value for the variable inside
> > ${LOCALBASE}/etc/config.site, and configure will automagically pick it up.
> > 
> > ie:
> >     roskens@hysteria$ cat /usr/pkg/etc/config.site
> >     lt_cv_sys_max_cmd_len=65536
> 
> Ah, didn't know that. But what I was referring to was to touch autotools to
> write their output into some file (well, probably this one as it's already
> taken care of already) automatically (sorted|uniq'd, whatever) so the usual
> user doesn't have to do this himself, doesn't run into the chance of writing
> nonsense there, and can rely on it getting updated accordingly if he updates.

I do know that it saves some stuff into config.cache. Thats probably a place to
start getting the values.

> To get the right value atm, you'd have to run configure somewhere and look
> at its results files to extract the right thing, that's unneeded 
> user-interaction and error-prone. If there was some package in the tree which
> just was there to run a configure stage with *every* function and *every*
> header, *every* binary being recorded that the base system possibly offers
> (that is, start from what NetBSD offers (stdlib.h inttypes.h errno.h etc. etc.)
> and have configure sort out things on non-NetBSD pkgsrc hosts). Run once,
> save time, ... -- automatically --, that's the point.

I definately like this idea. Its something I would like to see available.

> I'd send patches, but I'm no masochist, never dealt with autotools more
> than a little I had to at the time (*still shuddering*), so if there is
> someone comfortable with it, it's probably trivial for them ... 

I've not written anything to use autotools, just looked at how some of it was done.
I know enough to be dangerous, but not enough to write my own stuff. 8)

Ron