How does mkproject compare to autoproject? A quick browse of the
former suggests more license choices, including a couple I’ve never
heard of before.
Autoproject wants to lay out the project according to GNU coding
standards unless explicitly told not to. Which is usually done,
because unless your project is part of the GNU project, you probably
want a “basically GNUish but not quite GNU project proper” layout.
JosephOn Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 02:14:47PM +0200, Juan Manuel Borges Ca?o wrote:
“Make Project” a.k.a. mkproject is for that kind of people that does not
want to mess with a point & click integrated development environment, but
rather stick to configuration files and scripting them,
https://code.google.com/p/makeproject/ . Currently uses autoconf et friends
as backend but can generate you a customized starting project in a line. It
can ./configure; make; make install from start, but to keep your
development you have to play with configure.ac, and Makefile.am files. The
documentation in this subjects are dense, but the real usage of them is
just to change/add source files to Makefile.am, and if you rely on
pkg-config handling dependencies is also as easy as adding the package
module name to DEP_MODULES in configure.ac. Advantages over plain
Makefiles, what just i told + it generates a more professional/complete
plain Makefiles that offer make; make clean; make dist (tarballs); make
distcheck (checks correct installation pro); make tests (any easy checks
that you can configure in Makefile.am too), and so on, the lists don’t
stop, keeping the said, you just change/add source files and module names
to deps, at a minimal view.
As much as I consider autoconf/automake rapid itself, I consider mkproject
a rapid autoconf/automake tool for the setup part, that found missing in
the autoconf/automake stack,
2 cents, if you find it useful let me know.
I hardly found an autoproject homepage, since it seems version 0.20(stable)
released on 25 February 2006 according to *
http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Autoproject* . From what i don’t quickly
gather the project seems forgotten, and if it has any valid use it is just
at the casuality of autotools, offers only c/c++ projects, and its command
line interface is not as robust as mkproject.
Have fun, though i do not see the point for a comparison here ;DOn Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 6:39 PM, T. Joseph Carter < tjcarter at spiritsubstance.com> wrote:
How does mkproject compare to autoproject? A quick browse of the former
suggests more license choices, including a couple I’ve never heard of
before.
Autoproject wants to lay out the project according to GNU coding standards
unless explicitly told not to. Which is usually done, because unless your
project is part of the GNU project, you probably want a “basically GNUish
but not quite GNU project proper” layout.
Joseph
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 02:14:47PM +0200, Juan Manuel Borges Ca?o wrote:
“Make Project” a.k.a. mkproject is for that kind of people that does not
want to mess with a point & click integrated development environment, but
rather stick to configuration files and scripting them,
https://code.google.com/p/**makeproject/https://code.google.com/p/makeproject/. Currently uses autoconf et friends
as backend but can generate you a customized starting project in a line.
It
can ./configure; make; make install from start, but to keep your
development you have to play with configure.ac, and Makefile.am files.
The
documentation in this subjects are dense, but the real usage of them is
just to change/add source files to Makefile.am, and if you rely on
pkg-config handling dependencies is also as easy as adding the package
module name to DEP_MODULES in configure.ac. Advantages over plain
Makefiles, what just i told + it generates a more professional/complete
plain Makefiles that offer make; make clean; make dist (tarballs); make
distcheck (checks correct installation pro); make tests (any easy checks
that you can configure in Makefile.am too), and so on, the lists don’t
stop, keeping the said, you just change/add source files and module names
to deps, at a minimal view.
As much as I consider autoconf/automake rapid itself, I consider mkproject
a rapid autoconf/automake tool for the setup part, that found missing in
the autoconf/automake stack,
2 cents, if you find it useful let me know.
_____________**
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/**listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.orghttp://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org