Re: [upnp-sdk-dev] undocumented changes

[<tur...@ea...>]

qx...@gm... wrote:
> So what switch was defined for Sparc Solaris systems for that proje=
ct?
>  =20
this is autoconf, so normally we don't target a specific platform her=
e=20
(and anyway, a single define wouldn't make sense alone : which OS=
=20
version, compiler, ... ?). Instead we target specific features=20
(absence/presence of header files, symbols, tools, or more complex=
=20
cases) through the configure file. This allow easier evolution to oth=
er=20
platforms, versions, ...

If you want, I can help here, and provide the necessary configure.ac=
=20
changes. This will not make your changes more complex (replace #if=
=20
SPARC_SOLARIS by #if HAVE_xxx_feature (except in publicly installed=
=20
header files)). On the contrary, it will simplify further porting.


> Btw: The autoconf/automake tools IMHO are a monstrosity, complicate=
d and
> mainly unnecessary chump of software.
>  =20
there are a bit monstrous at first, I agree, but no other tool does a=
n=20
equivalent job, with the same level of pre-automated tasks (this is w=
hy=20
it is used in a majority of open-sources projects).
As soon as you have some non-trivial code that you want to run on=
=20
different Unix flavors, compilers and environment, you have to go in=
=20
that direction. For example in libupnp now, you shouldn't have to wor=
ry=20
anymore about the shared or static library production, or versionning=
,=20
or the pthread flags to use, ...


R=E9mi