Re: [PATCH] {maint} distcheck: add support for AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 06/15/2011 07:57 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/15/2011 11:31 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS is useful in situations when a plain
> > > > "./configure" is not meaningful to a source tree, i.e. when a
> > > > source-tree mandatorily requires some configuration argument.
> > > Such a source-tree is violating GNU Coding Standards.
> > a) DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS makes it compliant.
> No, {AM_}DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS makes it possible for 'make
> distcheck' to paper over the GCS violation.
Your view - My view differs.
> 'make distcheck' is not mandated by GCS.  Rather, it is a handy helper
> to prove that the rest of things that _are_ mandated by GCS are obeyed.
>   One of those GCS requirements is that './configure' in isolation do
> something useful, rather than fail, if all prerequisite packages are
> installed.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/standards.html#Configuration
"...if all reprequiste packages are installed..." there are situations 
where this is impossible or at least hard to implement.

C.f. what I wrote in my previous mail or think about making "make 
distcheck" working for, say gcc or newlib ;-)

> > b) There are situations, in which it's technically very hard if not
> > impossible to make automake's vanilla "make distcheck" functional.
> And the fact that such cases exist, contrary to GCS, is why it is nice
> of automake to give hooks to make 'make distcheck' easier to paper over
> these shortcomings in GCS compliance in the meantime.
Again, I disagree ... not doing so would make automake a toy, which 
lacks contact to reality.

> > >    On the other
> > > hand, automake strives to be useful to more than just GCS-compliant
> > > packages.
> > Agreed.
> Sounds like we're in violent agreement, then :)
Well, yes - religiously sticking with idealistic, non-realistic ideals 
(which some people would call silly) doesn't help anybody.

In other words: IMO, automake is right in encouraging users to avod 
DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS, but it would be "beyond reason" for automake 
to abandon it.

Ralf