Subject: Re: Configure fails on checking argument types of select (Now XPM)

From: Steven Michael ROBBINS <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 13:49:03 -0400 (EDT)

Hi gang,

I haven't been on the list for quite some time, due to lack of time.

But I just dropped by the web site to see what is going on, and I see that
the configuration stuff is still giving people problems.  Sigh.

In particular, there was a message about why "make install" builds stuff
even after "make" succeeds.  I'll answer Dan's question (attached).

The reason the shell scripts are FORCEd, is to allow people to do

	./configure
	make
	make install prefix=/something/else

If the shell scripts are NOT rebuilt at "make install" time, they COULD
have incorrect paths coded into them.  Thus, the answer to Dan's question
is clearly "no".

Of course, rebuilding the shell scripts and FvmwForm scripts would be
unnecessary if they could compute the correct path at run time ...

Cheers all,

Keep up the good work!

---------- message from Dan ----------

[email-masked] (Paul D. Smith) writes:
> %% "Michael Kirby" <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
>   mk> I think that a make install (assuming that make has successfully 
>   mk> run), should NEVER write to the file system of the source directory.
> 
> I agree, this is definitely a no-no.
> 
> Can you submit a bug report on it, so we won't forget to fix it before
> 2.4?  Thx.

The behaviour in question is not just in FvwmForm, its also in FvwmTile
and FvwmCascade, and in the utils directory in fvwmbug.sh.

This is when part of the change was introduced:

Wed Apr 28 20:45:51 1999  Steve Robbins  <[email-masked]>

        * FvwmRearrange/Makefile.am (FvwmCascade):
        * FvwmRearrange/Makefile.am (FvwmTile):
        * FvwmForm/Makefile.am (FvwmTalk): force generation each time.

If I understand why Steve added a dependency on "FORCE", wouldn't
making the dependency on "Makefile" work even better?

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 14:13:35 -0400

> 	make install prefix=/something/else

Hi Steve, I'm going to copy you since I'm not sure from your comment
as to whether you are on the list now.

Isn't it:

  ./configure --prefix=/something/else

I just tried make install with a prefix and it didn't have any effect.

Perhaps you mean:

  make FVWM_CONFIGDIR=/something/else
  make install FVWM_CONFIGDIR=/something/else

although I haven't tried that and I don't know if that works either.

BTW, Bob said that writing in the build directory during make install
is definitely a no-no, and when Bob speaks on this subject... well
you get the idea.

--
Dan Espen
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854                     Phone: (732) 699-5570
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Steven Michael ROBBINS <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 14:33:32 -0400 (EDT)

> as to whether you are on the list now.

Thanks.  I'm no longer on the list.

>   make install FVWM_CONFIGDIR=/something/else

Yes.  To allow this, anything with FVWM_CONFIGDIR has to be rebuilt *every
time* "make" is run.

> is definitely a no-no, and when Bob speaks on this subject... well

I agree that one would like to avoid this.  

Maybe one could achieve the desired results without writing into the build
directory (writing into /tmp, instead, for example). Or perhaps allowing
one to set build variables like "prefix" or "FVWM_CONFIGDIR" after
configuring is just not worth the bother.  

-Steve

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 21 Oct 1999 15:00:51 -0400

>> make install FVWM_CONFIGDIR=/something/else

It's not legal or supported to give different values of prefix (or
FVWM_CONFIGDIR) at "make install" time than you did at "make" time.
This is a basic rule of autoconf/automake/etc. (indeed, IMO, any sane
build system :).

The _ONLY_ time you would do this (set prefix differently on install
than during the build) is if you wanted to stage the installation
somewhere to later move it to the right place; I often do this to see
what gets installed where, since I support a single filesystem that
provides an identical view for many different UNIX variants and I have
to put stuff in various places (it all looks right in the end due to the
magic of symlinke!).

In that case, of course, you don't WANT the different prefix value to
show up in the scripts; that would be wrong.

Of course the preferred way to do this (staging) is to use DESTDIR but
some older packages don't support that yet (automake didn't used to
support it in earlier versions), so both ways should work.

  smr> Yes.  To allow this, anything with FVWM_CONFIGDIR has to be
  smr> rebuilt *every time* "make" is run.

Yes, but not "make install".  IOW, these tools should be rebuilt as part
of the "make" process, but not as part of "make install".

  >> is definitely a no-no, and when Bob speaks on this subject... well

Actually, I think I was the one who said that... so I guess it's still
open to debate :).

  smr> Maybe one could achieve the desired results without writing into
  smr> the build directory (writing into /tmp, instead, for example). Or
  smr> perhaps allowing one to set build variables like "prefix" or
  smr> "FVWM_CONFIGDIR" after configuring is just not worth the bother.

It's The Wrong Thing to change the path in these scripts based in the
prefix, etc. values during "make install".  That's all there is to it.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <[email-masked]>         Network Management Development
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:10:29 -0400

> Actually, I think I was the one who said that... so I guess it's still

I'm sorry, I know the difference between Bob and Paul, I guess I'm
just loosing my mind.

Anyway I value both of your opinions.

---

From: Steven Michael ROBBINS <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 15:49:32 -0400 (EDT)

> FVWM_CONFIGDIR) at "make install" time than you did at "make" time.

Yes, forgive me.  I was not thinking clearly.

It's been a long while, but I think I was originally considering the
"make" and not "make install" case.  
<http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/archive/9904/msg00769.html>

> of the "make" process, but not as part of "make install".

I can agree with this.

-S

---

From: Bob Woodside <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 23:21:53 -0400

> I'm sorry, I know the difference between Bob and Paul, I guess I'm

	That's OK, I think I may be the patron saint of misattributors...it's
that darned middle-aged cerebral-digital disconnect.

Cheers,
Bob