Re: 5.3.1

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 22/12/16 01:40 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Dec 22,  8:03am, Ray Andrews wrote:
> } Subject: Re: 5.3.1
> }
> } Marvellous.  Five years kicking around in Linux and I only learn this
> } now.
>
> apt-get build-dep is a Debian thing, not a Linux thing in general.

Sure.  These competing package managers all have their own ideas.
> } BTW, why is it that an edit of 'config.modules' is always quietly
> } overwritten by the installer?
>
> It's not overwritten by "the installer".  It has a dependency on the
> files generated by the "configure" script, so it will only be remade
> if configure has been re-run.  Normally this happens during the
> execution of configure itself, so any edits to config.modules that
> you do will cause config.modules to be newer than its dependencies,
> and it will not be rebuilt.

Rather in the style of 'make' itself.  So in my case, the wiping out of 
my edits
can be considered as a report that the module was not built, yes?
> If configure is running, the assumption is that preconditions for the
> build have changed, so config.modules is regenerated from the defaults
> in Src/**/*.mdd files.  This is also how new modules are picked up.
>
> You aren't supposed to need to run "configure" more than once on the
> same build tree unless something about the preconditions is changing.
> If you are routinely re-running configure when none of the templates
> from which it is built (e.g. configure.ac) has changed, you're doing
> more work than necessary.
Good to know.  Yes, I have tended to do it every time for lack of 
knowing that I don't
need to.  I'm also unclear as to 'make' and 'make install' so again I do 
them both.
> Anyway, if you actually read either the INSTALL file or the comments
> in config.modules itself:
>
> # Values of `auto' are `yes' or `no'. configure sets the value to
> # `yes'.  If you set it by hand to `no', the line will be retained
> # when the file is regenerated in future.

Before yesterday I didn't really expect things to be overwritten anyway, 
so I took the
'retained' as meaning 'autoload'.   INSTALL is rather intimidating if 
one simply wants
a plain vanilla situation.  You have to already be an expert to really 
understand it.  Typical of 'nix
culture tho, the docs are a summary of the knowledge of the expert 
written for others
exactly like himself and not much use to people who don't already 
understand everything
that's in it.  zsh no more hierographic than any other tho.
> I should have remembered that.  I've forgotten why I stopped using it
> and went with a local copy ... probably because for quite a while I
> was switching back and forth between static and dynamic linking on
> a regular basis and needed two copies of the file to do so.
It is comforting to know that even you forget some of this stuff, I 
don't feel quite so stupid.