Re: A couple of problems with new module code.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> wrote:
Wrong. Don't upgrade requirements to >= while something else
(the
core, yet!) requires <=. It's a massive pain in the ass, because some
people won't have one or the other, and those who have both will make
varying decisions about the default. If that file works with autoconf
2.13, just copy it to configure.in.
If it was intended to be used by or with the core in any way, I would
agree. But those configure scripts are only to be used when the module
is built independently of the core (in theory, at least; I don't know
why they are getting invoked in Steve's builds, and I will certainly put
a stop to it once I understand the mechanism).
We could remove the ability to build the modules separately for now, if
that seems wise to the other developers.
Running defaults is easy. But what happens when somebody adds
options
to one of the configure sub-scripts? How do they get passed?
They don't get passed. Those configure scripts are only used when
building the modules separately. Anything extra needed by the core
modules will have to be added to the top-level configure script as well
as appearing in the module-specific configure script.
--
Jerry James
http://www.ittc.ku.edu/~james/