[antlr-interest] Re: 2.7.2 build system is fubar

Dave <davekam at pobox.com> davekam at pobox.com
Mon Feb 17 07:34:32 PST 2003


--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, Ric Klaren <klaren at c...> wrote:
> > -- on a similar note, it sounds like it's not necessary to recompile
> > the jar's just to get the C++ runtime working, but that's what the
> > current Makefile does. I haven't tried to make from the lib/cpp
> > directory yet.
> 
> Submakes should work well as long as configure has run.

Yes, I've tried it now -- works fine. But maybe it should be possible
to install antlr and antlr-config without recompiling the java? No
biggie though. The compiling works fine and all. Just, well, you're
not supposed to have to recompile java when the source hasn't changed? ;)

> > -- make install should install everything that's necessary. is the
> > antlr directory necessary? it certainly appears to be, but I'm not
> > sure. just antlr.jar and/or antlrall.jar appear not to be sufficient.
> 
> The antlrall.jar and the header files and the libantlr.a files used
to be
> enough to use the tool. I'll check if this is still the case.

Yes, you are correct -- my problems were caused by the lack of export
in the antlr wrapper, which I hadn't caught yet.

> There's no functionality in automake that that is not easily added
to the
> current Makefile's. Automake will only make it harder for me to maintain
> (keeping up with new versions and debugging automake stuff is sheer
hell).
> So in short I won't do it, and I will not accept patches on antlr to
> support it either.

OK, apologies for jumping to conclusions -- it just seems like most
programs are using automake these days. But I'm only just learning
about it so I don't really know what it's like to debug, etc.

Dave


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



More information about the antlr-interest mailing list