← Back to context

Comment by astrange

3 years ago

configure would print that it's not enabled, so it seems like the kind of thing people would eventually notice.

5 comments

astrange

Reply
masklinn  3 years ago

Maybe, eventually, but how many people read the reams of garbage autoconf spouts out until the feature they wanted fails to materialize?

  • astrange  3 years ago

    I used to and it's actually how I got a large part of my computer skills, but unfortunately I got medicated for ADHD and became normal and can't do it anymore.

    But I still think reading boring logs is a great way to understand a system. Turning on all the intermediates for a compiler (llvm ghc etc) is very educational too.

  • makomk  3 years ago

    The actual compiler output from the autoconf feature test is one of the things I'd probably look at fairly early on if some feature is disabled when it shouldn't be, but I maybe have a bit more experience running into problems with this than younger folks.

    • masklinn  3 years ago

      > if some feature is disabled when it shouldn't be

      That's my point, you're going to look at autoconf's output if a feature you're expecting is missing.

      But would you think to have a test or expectation for landlock in xz? How would you even check if landlock is enabled for a process?

takeda  3 years ago

Looks like he only introduced that "bug" in CMake. Was there migration in progress from autoconf to cmake?