Subject: Re: mk/gnu-config question/request
To: Johnny C. Lam <>
From: Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/12/2005 22:51:00
-On [20050612 20:48], Johnny C. Lam ( wrote:
>We've discussed this in the past, and we don't want to ever automatically
>run the GNU autotools.  We often patch configure scripts and
>files directly since in the past, GNU autotool-generated files have
>been highly dependent on having the correct minor version of either
>GNU autoconf or GNU automake.

You rather prefer X times that set of lines/bunch of patches per pkg that
uses libtool/autoconf that does not support platform/OS X yet?

That's a high maintenance nightmare.

>Packages that set USE_LIBTOOL as well as USE_TOOLS+=autoconf will
>already automatically have libtool.m4 replaced with the version from
>the installed libtool package (see pkgsrc/mk/tools/  If
>you want to also replace automatically, could you please
>submit a patch against is but part of the problem.  What good is replacing libtool.m4 if
you are not regenerating the configure script anyway?
Since it is configure that does all the required checking and outputting of
the initial library support stuff.  libtool/ come in only much
later in the game.

I am trying to find a nice approach to solve this issue short of having to
manually fix up every single pkg that uses libtool/configure and doesn't
support OS X with its old stuff yet, but you're awfully limiting my
available options.  And I am definitely not going to manually patch up every
single pkg with the same sort of diffs, I can spend my time in more
constructive ways.

I see the angle you're coming from, but it is easier to make such a
statement if your OS is already supported than if it isn't. :(

Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! |   |
If we do not start at the beginning, we have no hope to arrive...