[FFmpeg-devel] [patch] allow build env to force sdl-config path via $SDL_CONFIG

[Måns Rullgård]

"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi at gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 7:27 PM, M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com> wrote:
>> "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi at gmail.com> writes:
>>  > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:33 PM, M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com> wrote:
>>  >> "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi at gmail.com> writes:
>>  >>  > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
>>  >>  >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 10:42:43PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>  >>  >>  > as is standard with pretty much all autotool-based build systems which
>>  >>  >>  > search for the sdl-config script, this patch allows people to force
>>  >>  >>  > the full path to sdl-config via the SDL_CONFIG env var.  so now you
>>  >>  >>  > can do:
>>  >>  >>  > SDL_CONFIG=/some/crazy/stupid/place/sdl-config ./configure
>>  >>  >>  > and ffmpeg will find the crazy stupid sdl
>>  >>  >>  >
>>  >>  >>  > --- configure (revision 11931)
>>  >>  >>  > +++ configure (working copy)
>>  >>  >>  > @@ -1693,7 +1693,7 @@ check_foo_config freetype2 freetype ft2b
>>  >>  >>  >
>>  >>  >>  >  disable sdl_too_old
>>  >>  >>  >  disable sdl
>>  >>  >>  > -SDL_CONFIG="${cross_prefix}sdl-config"
>>  >>  >>  > +SDL_CONFIG="${SDL_CONFIG-${cross_prefix}sdl-config}"
>>  >>  >>                            ^
>>  >>  >>  This '-' looks wrong.
>>  >>  >>
>>  >>  >>  Also, why can't you simply use PATH?
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > the location of the sdl-config wrapper may contain binaries that
>>  >>  > cannot be executed on the host.  i dont see why there's any objection
>>  >>  > to the change considering this behavior is perfectly standard for
>>  >>  > every autotool based package out there that looks for sdl-config.
>>  >>  >
>>  >>  > if you wanted to decrapify the ffmpeg configure script, you'd start
>>  >>  > using pkg-config which is much easier to control in a cross-compiling
>>  >>  > environment.  then people would only have to set one variable
>>  >>  > (PKG_CONFIG) or create one wrapper script (${cross_prefix}pkg-config).
>>  >>
>>  >>  If you want a nice reception around here, you'd start by not calling
>>  >>  the configure script crap.
>>  >
>>  > it is crap.  any large package that hand rolls their own build system
>>  > and forces people to learn their own special conventions that deviate
>>  > from every other package out there is crap.  perhaps you could
>>  > illustrate in what ways the current situation doesnt suck ?  i'm
>>  > really not interested in sugar coating reality so as to make people
>>  > feel better about the situation -- they should feel bad.
>>
>>  Your attitude is the only thing that's crap here.  Well, that and
>>  autoconf.
>
> inability to properly use autotools is what leads to homegrown build
> systems that doesnt scale at all.  i'm not making any claims that
> autotools is easy to use or understand, or that many people out there
> are good with it.  just that the alternatives are worse.

You're making a very broad claim there.  Why should I believe you,
when you fail to provide even a shred of evidence.

>>  If you think the script isn't doing what it should, it's your job to
>>  prove it.  You'd do that by describing your environment in sufficient
>>  detail, and providing a configure command line along with expected and
>>  actual results, plus an explanation of why the results are incorrect,
>>  should that not be obvious.  You have so far done none of the above.
>
> actually, i have.  i provided a very clean patch that breaks no
> existing behavior, completely retains the default behavior, and makes
> things more flexible and behave in standard ways like every other
> build system out there.  the only request for more information was
> answered with an acceptable reason.

I don't know what standards you are referring to.  The FFmpeg
configure script conforms, to the best of our knowledge, to the Single
UNIX Specification, Version 3.  This specification contains no mention
of "sdl-config" or "pkg-config".

>>  Barging in like this, shouting that everything is crap, you'll only
>>  make enemies.  FFmpeg developers have a reputation for being hostile
>>  to people far less repugnant than you.
>
> the fact that the configure script is crap is pretty self evident by
> simply reading it.  it resolves problems that existing build systems
> have already addressed.  it breaks in configurations that differ from
> whoever wrote it.  it simply doesnt scale.

Again you fail to point out *why* you think the script is crap.  I
have read it, and I do not find this claim self-evident.  If I did, I
would have fixed it already.  Perhaps the reality is that *you* didn't
understand it.  I am also at a complete loss understanding what you
might mean by saying the configure script doesn't scale.

> i dont know why you're taking things personally.  i never said you
> were stupid or that you're a bad person, nor anything about you at all

I occasionally take it personally when a complete stranger (that would
be you) starts telling me that the work I've done is crap.  It's a
quite natural reaction.

> (i dont even know who you are).

You've obviously not been around here very long.

> if i had the time, i'd assist in throwing it all out for something
> that does scale, but sadly i dont.  i only have time to extend it
> slightly when it breaks for me.

You'd be wasting your time.  We'll not be using autoconf, ever.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com