Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!emory!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!usc!trwind!venice!baur
From: baur@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM (Steven L. Baur)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: R5 Wish List (Imake to the bitbucket)
Message-ID: <675@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM>
Date: 18 Jul 90 06:23:40 GMT
References: <2767@uakari.primate.wisc.edu>
Organization: TRW Systems Engineering & Development Division, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 28

From article <2767@uakari.primate.wisc.edu>, by bin@primate.wisc.edu (Brain in Neutral):
> From article <MONTNARO.90Jul17154903@milkweed.crd.ge.com>, by montnaro@milkweed.crd.ge.com (Skip Montanaro):

>> How about getting rid of Imake and using GNU make instead for R5? I've never
>> gotten Imake to work properly, and always wind up translating Imakefiles
>> into GNUmakefiles.

> Ahh .... no.  Please don't.  Imake is wonderful.


It would be nice too, if those vendors out there who distribute binary-only
versions of X would include sufficient files to be able to make Imake work
at all.  (I won't name any names, you know who you are).

I have had *wonderful* results with Imake on a SUN3/OS4.03->4.1 with all-MIT
sources, and don't see any particular need to make it go away.  I wish though
that there wasn't so much (apparent to me, a novice X administrator)
dependence upon the X source hierarchy.  After installation of the mit area
of X, it should be possible to avoid having to use the MIT source hierarchy
as part of the Imake process.  I mean, I have set up my symbolic links to
/usr/bin/X11, etc.  Why do "contrib"uted programs have to rely on the core X
source tree?


X11R4 is wonderful, thanks MIT and the X Consortium.

--
steve	baur@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM