to imake or not to imake

to imake or not to imake

[malte]

I don't want to start any religious wars, but imake -once set up correctly-
usually shortens installation procedures to "imkmf; make install", especially
if the sources are as portable as rc is.
Before stating that imake doesn't work, one should have a look at imake
coming from Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center ( the original )
or the X11R5 thing.
For those who are not running imake, a Makefile can be included in the
distribution, ready to be hacked manually.

Of course, it is not worth installing imake just to configure rc.

Malte.

Re: to imake or not to imake

[schwartz]

| I don't want to start any religious wars, but imake -once set up correctly-
| usually shortens installation procedures to "imkmf; make install", especially
| if the sources are as portable as rc is.

But setting up imake is much harder than just setting up rc.  And it is
different for every package!  One directory full of imake config files
for InterViews, one for X11, one for Modula-3, etc, etc, etc.  And even
when you have all that stuff straightened out, you gain nothing over
what we have now:  editing a Makefile to comment out a couple of
defines verses editing an Imakefile to comment out a couple of
defines... where's the win?  Keep simple things simple, please!

Re: to imake or not to imake

[Chris Siebenmann]

 Unless I am badly mistaken, Imake's (current) options do not answer much
of rc's configuration questions, if any. I don't want to install another
version of imake, or have to patch my Imake configuration files, just to
compile rc.

	- cks

to imake or not to imake

[jew]

On a similar note to the imake question, I haven't compiled the latest
version of rc because I didn't want to go find unproto, download it,
compile it, run it/or get the patch to make it work from the author.
I liked the awk scripts from before.  Do they work in place of
unproto?  (This is for an IBM PC/RT running AIX 2.2.1)