Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #15696

Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code

From Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code
Date 2012-01-10 13:20 -0600
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <jei31b$6gs$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <9483089.582.1326104763671.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prj1> <jeem8a$j29$1@speranza.aioe.org> <24410129.1748.1326117394708.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prdv33> <jeevr9$be5$1@speranza.aioe.org> <24443819.178.1326187271689.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prfj5>

Show all headers | View raw

On 10-Jan-12 03:21, ArifulHossain tuhin wrote:
> On Monday, January 9, 2012 9:07:23 PM UTC+6, Rui Maciel wrote:
>> ArifulHossain tuhin wrote:
>>> One example, there was a small project i was involved, which was modifying
>>> a tiny "media realy" software. The project has only 20 10-15 c files. we
>>> need to add some of our own. because of the hideous build systems. And it
>>> was not necessary to maintain this small project with autotools. we ended
>>> up writing custom makefiles for the project.
>>
>> That is strange.  Were those files C source code files?  And did anyone in 
>> that team had any experience with the GNU build system, or was everyone 
>> cutting their teeth on it?
> 
> Our team was(and still is) little inexperienced dealing with Gnu Build
> system.  Lot of them used to develop in java/c# or visual studio. Our
> organization is trying to train us, hopefully we won't be new in coming
> months.

Hopefully that training is coming from someone with significant
experience.  It can be a pretty steep learning curve.

> But still i believe a moderate sized project can be done by handwritten
> makefiles because the similarity in POSIX systems. Yes they require
> tweaks and won't be "automated".

That's the major feature of autotools: to not need to tweak makefiles
for each target platform.

For in-house apps that only have a few targets, learning autotools is
probably not worth the effort; for open-source apps that have to run on
dozens of targets, each with varying libraries and other apps installed,
and which may be cross-compiled or installed in different locations,
it's well worth it.

> But autotools are no different. Most of the time, they need tweaks too.

If so, you're (probably) doing it wrong.

> The problem is the "tweak"s are not very understandable because of the
> complexity associated with Autotools. Whereas makefiles are rather
> straight forward.

That's just a matter of what you're used to.  If I learned the autotools
system first, I'd probably find that easier than makefiles.  The build
systems in the MS tools are baffling to me, but if that's what you
learned first, that's probably easier for you than makefiles.

S

-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 02:26 -0800
  Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 11:47 +0000
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-09 13:56 +0100
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:45 -0800
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 14:46 +0000
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 01:11 -0800
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 15:58 +0000
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code falk@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) - 2012-01-09 18:41 +0000
  Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 12:23 +0000
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-09 08:45 -0500
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code superpollo <superpollo@tznvy.pbz> - 2012-01-09 15:02 +0100
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-09 16:11 +0000
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:56 -0800
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 15:07 +0000
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 01:21 -0800
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-01-10 13:20 -0600
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 06:57 -0800
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:23 +0000
  Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 13:48 +0100
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:11 +0000
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-09 05:27 -0800
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:41 +0000
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:09 -0800
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 14:35 +0100
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:44 +0000
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:18 -0800
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 18:59 +0100
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-01-09 19:01 +0100
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 19:21 +0000
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 20:48 +0100
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> - 2012-01-10 14:26 -0600
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 21:44 +0100
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> - 2012-01-10 15:45 -0600
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:12 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-11 11:10 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-01-11 11:52 -0500
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-11 17:01 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-01-11 12:11 -0500
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 09:08 +0000
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 08:22 +0000
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 08:54 +0000
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 13:57 +0000
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-09 19:21 +0000
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-09 19:52 +0000
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-09 20:20 +0000
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:16 -0800
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-09 06:02 -0800
  Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-09 14:50 -0800
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-09 23:20 +0000
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 00:23 +0000
    Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Dirk Zabel <zabel@riccius-sohn.eu> - 2012-01-10 17:44 +0100
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 07:13 -0800
      Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Nick Bowler <nbowler@draconx.ca> - 2012-01-17 20:36 +0000
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code ec429 <ec429@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-01-17 23:06 +0000
          Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2012-01-17 15:32 -0800
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-18 00:40 +0000
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-18 18:35 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-18 19:15 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-21 21:32 +0000
            Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-18 07:26 +0100
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "Joachim Schmitz" <nospam.jojo@schmitz-digital.de> - 2012-01-18 11:07 +0100
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-21 21:32 +0000
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 10:42 +1300
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-22 18:53 +0100
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-22 19:00 +0100
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-23 19:28 +0100
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-01-18 08:44 -0600
              Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-18 07:09 -0800
                Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-01-18 17:44 +0100
        Re: Writing "absolutely" portable code Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-18 07:58 +0000

csiph-web