[article] trimming down autoconf's configure scripts by using pkg-config

[Russell Shaw]

Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 03:08:15AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> 
>>>Huh? Name a language that is available on more platforms than a Bourne
>>>shell...
>>
>>java ?
> 
> Hmm, some time ago I ported some software to an Hitachi SR8000 which did
> have a Bourne shell but did not have Java support (it did not even have
> the notion of shared libraries). Autoconf worked on it just fine.
> 
> But to name a more common OS, even Debian Sarge does not install java by
> default.
> 
>>autoconf is no control language. it is an collection of macros for
>>generating shellcripts which then generate makfiles ...
> 
> WTF are you smoking? How a language is interpreted (compiled to byte
> code or machine code, translated to some other language, or executed
> immediately) has nothing to do with the definition of "language".

How so? Just because a C program does everything with function names,
doesn't make it any less a C program. Autoconf is just M4 macros which
doesn't make it any less M4.

Like any library, you need to learn the parameter naming and passing
conventions.

> You can write autoconf source code. You can "compile" it using autoconf.
> You can execute the result. You can not even complain that the compiled
> version is a shell script that requires an external program (/bin/sh) to
> run, because for example the compiled version of Java programs also
> require an external program (the Java VM) to run.

M4 is being used as a "description language" for an autoconf "configure"
machine-generator. The generator outputs a machine in the form of executable
shell code ("configure").