[ODE] status of autoconf?

[Jens Thiele]

 > I would include these files into CVS (and distribution
 > in general):
 >
 > - Both configure.in *and* configure.  No autoconf is
 > required at installation.
 > When configure.in is changed (not often), configure is
 > regenerated (using autoconf),
 > and both checked in.
 >
 > - Both Makefile.am *and* Makefile.in.  No automake is
 > required at installation.
 > When Makefile.am is changed, Makefile.in is
 > regenerated (using configure),
 > and both checked in.  (Note that Makefile.in contains
 > no site-specific settings).
 >
 > - Do *not* include Makefile.
 >
 > - Additionally include other auxiliary files, such as:
 > aclocal.m4, missing, config.guess, config.sub,
 > install-sh, autogen, etc.
 >
 >

Well I think that is really a matter of taste. A distribution tarball should
of course include all the files => no need for autoconf/automake to compile

but in cvs it is really a matter of taste. If you assume the people getting
the code from cvs have autoconf/... - i would leave it out (you just
have to type
./autogen) - otherwise I would perhaps include it.

 > Yes, this sounds like a good plan.  If tests are
 > created which work even without
 > graphics, they should be put in a new directory, and
 > compiled even
 > with --enable-drawstuff=no.
 > It is trickier if you want such a test to be built
 > without drawstuff,
 > but *with* drawstuff *if* available.  I see this
 > possible if code using drawstuff
 > are isolated using #ifdefs. (The availablilty of
 > drawstuff (ODE_DS)
 > should be included in the generated config.h,
 > currently it isn't).
 >
yep - how should the define be called ? (perhaps not ODE_DS ;-)



-- 
email karme@unforgettable.com
IRC   Karme
HP    http://www-ti.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/~thiele