[LLVMdev] Removing $(LLVM_SRC_ROOT)/autoconf dependensies in Stacker, llvm-java [PATCH]

[Chris Lattner]

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Reid Spencer wrote:

> Personally, I don't think LLVM projects should need much in the way of
> autoconf stuff. They certainly don't need to replicate things like
> install-sh and mkinstalldirs. I'd vote for taking these out of the
> projects rather than making the makefiles deal with them. I think in
> most cases these are just historical artifacts that have been with the
> projects since long before the new Makefile.rules of last fall.

I agree.

>> llvm/Makefile.config.in have lines:
>>
>> INSTALL_SH := $(LLVM_SRC_ROOT)/autoconf/install-sh
>> MKDIR      := $(LLVM_SRC_ROOT)/autoconf/mkinstalldirs
>>
>> But all this projects (LLVM, Stacker, sample, llvm-java) have
>> autoconf/install-sh and autoconf/mkinstalldirs in own sources.
>
> Which they probably shouldn't have. I'd vote for removing these files
> from the projects.

Agreed.  If projects choose to use our makefiles, they can know and use 
the main copies of these that LLVM provides.

>> I think at building, for example, llvm-java use
>> llvm-java/autoconf/install-sh is more correct (synchronized version with
>> other autoconf files and configure in project sources)
>
> I think that it just leads to confusion. LLVM should provide the core
> set of tools (mklib, install-sh, mkinstalldirs, etc.) needed by the
> makefile system (since LLVM owns the makefile system). LLVM projects
> that want to use this system should use its facilities and not override
> them. If someone doesn't want to do that, then it shouldn't be regarded
> as an LLVM project (in the makefile sense).

However, projects should continue to be able to have their own configure 
scripts.  It would be nice if this was optional though! :)

> On a larger scale, I have toyed with the idea of making the LLVM
> Makefile system just a separate public domain software project that
> anyone can use. But, not sure how everyone would feel about that.

If it didn't make things any uglier, I personally wouldn't have a problem 
with it.  They should be significantly refactored first though.

-Chris

-- 
http://nondot.org/sabre/
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/