Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Python recompile
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 00:45:10 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vqar6m$2lg6a$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vq1qas$j22$1@gallifrey.nk.ca> <vq1uvb$qbuq$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq22nc$rvb8$1@dont-email.me> <vq24kd$rg6i$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq3oag$18iv6$1@dont-email.me> <vq4hf2$1brf7$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq4l3d$1ck9e$1@dont-email.me> <vq4m0u$1ctpn$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq4n05$1d5dv$1@dont-email.me> <vq4om7$1dbo2$2@dont-email.me>
	<vq6dqh$1pskk$1@dont-email.me> <vq6f8p$1pmnk$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq6gqc$1qcp8$1@dont-email.me> <vq6ips$1pmnk$2@dont-email.me>
	<vq6j5h$1qosf$1@dont-email.me> <20250304092827.708@kylheku.com>
	<vq7g1p$1vmg5$1@dont-email.me> <vq94dt$2boso$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqai13$2jr7s$2@dont-email.me> <vqaol7$2l1ar$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 01:45:10 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5fed1e3e41d7a92fa0a0e33e61fef7d8";
	logging-data="2801866"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Vo2ezuto9lcn8v4qeQrV2"
User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pV1DUfF2ikI0cZZ6urfmfi0KzZQ=

On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 00:01:45 +0000, bart wrote:

> On 05/03/2025 22:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 09:10:21 -0000 (UTC), Muttley wrote:
>> 
>>> Frankly any build system that has a 35K configure file needs
>>> revisiting. No package is so complex as to require that much setup.
>> 
>> Feel free to “revisit” it, and let us know what can be dropped.
> 
> Pretty much all of it? Most of it seems to be about determining system
> characteristics, something you don't need to repeat for every
> application you build on /the same machine/.

Where is there a common set of checks for all the dependencies that every 
open-source app might need? There are thousands of such libraries out 
there, with new ones appearing all the time. Checking for them all would 
require an even bigger script than what we have now.

> Besides, what is the point of determining whether a C implementation
> supports 'stdio.h' for example?

That check seems to be specific to the macOS/Darwin kernel. My guess is, 
some diehard Apple fans wanted it. Some braindead Apple setup? I don’t 
know, ask them.

Actually, no, I think it is something to do with “universal architecture” 
support on macOS/Darwin. If that is not properly enabled, then the C 
compiler will not find the right header files for the architecture.

You see now, the kinds of complications open-source software has to cope 
with? You have no idea, with your Windows-only apps being toys by 
comparison.

> In any case, the configure script is not run for every incremental
> build, but there is nothing to stop the C implementation changing or
> being deleted in the meantime.

This is why we have package managers on Linux, to ensure things stay 
consistent.

>> The code doesn’t write itself, you know.
> 
> The configure file doesn't write the application code.

It often does, actually.