Re: Have configure complain about unknown options

I am worried if we change the default behavior that build systems will
fail, but fail after our release when they go to package, and we will
not get feedback until to late.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 09:13:54AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Well, --strict would be tricky, if it's possible. My reading of the
> > > autoconf code doesn't indicate a means of doing adding abitrary
> > > options. But something like --enable-strict-options would be fairly
> > > straight forward. Problem being, if you mistype that option, it'll seem
> > > to work even when it isn't :)
> >
> > I've been bitten by this in the past as well. I'd vote for applying the
> > patch as-is, no "strict mode" necessary (because, as you say, it's easy
> > to get it wrong).
>
> How about the reverse, an option to relax the checking.
> --disable-strict-options for example?
>
> > Can the Debian build script be fixed? Does the RPM spec have the same
> > problem?
>
> Looking at the source it may be an artifact of the CDBS build system
> used to build the package. It knows that the autotools are in use and
> appends it automatically. FWIW, I'd just add a line to the case
> statement accepting the enable_maintainer_mode variable since it's
> harmless and we're trying to catch typos here, not actual options that
> don't apply in our case.
>
> Have a nice day,
> --
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
-- End of PGP section, PGP failed!

--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +