[3467] in BarnOwl Developers
Re: [barnowl] Update and make configurable the default format (#136)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason Gross)
Sun Jun 9 12:49:57 2013
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 09:49:55 -0700
From: Jason Gross <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: barnowl/barnowl <reply+i-15055026-2049c87dc71753ba41b2922153aac251ad51a146-4475081@reply.github.com>
To: barnowl/barnowl <barnowl@noreply.github.com>
In-Reply-To: <barnowl/barnowl/pull/136@github.com>
----==_mimepart_51b4b2336ac2e_6d90d75dd4895a3
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 09:49:55 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-ID: <51b4b2336d20d_6d90d75dd4896db@worker4.rs.github.com.mail>
:+1: on the idea/change
We might want `AC_ARG_ENABLE` rather than `AC_ARG_WITH` (and `--enable-` rather than `--with-`); AIUI, they work in essentially the same way, except that `AC_ARG_WITH` makes `./configure` label this as a package, whereas `AC_ARG_ENABLE` makes `./configure` label this as a feature (which is what I think this is). If you disagree, it'll probably be fairly easy to convince me otherwise; I'm not too attached to it either way, and mostly wanted to make you aware of this distinction. (For example, `./configure --without-zephyr-default-format='yes'` errors with `configure: error: invalid package name: zephyr-default-format=yes` and `./configure --help` lists this with packages rather than features. (Speaking of which, why do we have `--with-stack-protector` there?))
Additionally, due to bash silliness, `make` will fail if we do something silly like `./configure --with-zephyr-default-format='foo"'`. But I don't think this is reasonably fixable.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/barnowl/barnowl/pull/136#issuecomment-19169315
----==_mimepart_51b4b2336ac2e_6d90d75dd4895a3
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 09:49:55 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-ID: <51b4b2336df48_6d90d75dd489720@worker4.rs.github.com.mail>
<p><img class="emoji" title=":+1:" alt=":+1:" src="https://a248.e.akamai.net/assets.github.com/images/icons/emoji/+1.png" height="20" width="20" align="absmiddle"> on the idea/change</p>
<p>We might want <code>AC_ARG_ENABLE</code> rather than <code>AC_ARG_WITH</code> (and <code>--enable-</code> rather than <code>--with-</code>); AIUI, they work in essentially the same way, except that <code>AC_ARG_WITH</code> makes <code>./configure</code> label this as a package, whereas <code>AC_ARG_ENABLE</code> makes <code>./configure</code> label this as a feature (which is what I think this is). If you disagree, it'll probably be fairly easy to convince me otherwise; I'm not too attached to it either way, and mostly wanted to make you aware of this distinction. (For example, <code>./configure --without-zephyr-default-format='yes'</code> errors with <code>configure: error: invalid package name: zephyr-default-format=yes</code> and <code>./configure --help</code> lists this with packages rather than features. (Speaking of which, why do we have <code>--with-stack-protector</code> there?))</p>
<p>Additionally, due to bash silliness, <code>make</code> will fail if we do something silly like <code>./configure --with-zephyr-default-format='foo"'</code>. But I don't think this is reasonably fixable.</p>
<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">—<br>Reply to this email directly or <a href='https://github.com/barnowl/barnowl/pull/136#issuecomment-19169315'>view it on GitHub</a>.<img src='https://github.com/notifications/beacon/JJk3yKd0u6qAmPAmJXdf99lbpeDhTmH4RRsFgUZVxsWHjq7cATHmpnpxZ6OYAZvE.gif' height='1' width='1'></p>
----==_mimepart_51b4b2336ac2e_6d90d75dd4895a3--
