[LCP] Difficulty learning Autotools

[Moises Silva]

I agree. I had the same problem some months ago when I wanted to
package my open source library libopenr2. I ended up searching a small
library already using autotools for the build and use it as a basic
example, so far I have been able to fulfill my basic needs with the
autoconf documentation. However, some time ago, when I wanted my
library to be portable across operating systems, one user recommended
to me cmake: http://www.cmake.org/

I have not tried it yet, but looks promising.

Moy

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Christopher Howard <choward at indicium.us> wrote:
> I wanted to learn Autoconf and Automake, but as I get into it I'm find the
> challenge rather daunting. And as far as I can tell from the Internet, I'm
> not the only one who thinks the Autotools are rather complex.
>
> I think there are IDEs that handle the details of autotools, but as far as
> I can tell they are all graphical IDEs, and I only code in the shell.
>
> Is there an alternative to the Autotools which is easier to use? Or
> perhaps some kind of wrapper around the Autotools which makes it easier to
> use?
>
> --
> Christopher Howard
> http://indicium.us
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Linux C Programming List
> :  http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linuxcprogramming List
>



-- 
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the
death your right to say it." Voltaire