sorry what ? I remember hours in my younger years searching which Debian package provided autowhateverflavoroftheday.sh so that I could build $random internet project
> sorry what ? I remember hours in my younger years searching which Debian package provided autowhateverflavoroftheday.sh so that I could build $random internet project
The whole point of Autotools is that distributed source packages can be built by themselves, without requiring any part of Autotools to be installed. They build even on obscure systems that don't have any working version of Autotools.
If you have to install autoanything to build a random project that uses Autotools, either you are doing something wrong, or the project is using Autotools wrong, or maybe the Debian package is using Autotools wrong.
That said, I know what you mean. I've had to seek out a number of different versions of Autotools just to get some things to build. But that is because a lot of projects and/or distro packaging blatantly uses Autotools differently than it's was designed to be used. I don't think Autotools should be blamed for this.
(I don't know what build system I'd pick these days - probably just write the Makefiles by hand.)
yes, it absolutely should be. If a tool is misused, it's generally because it's hard to use correctly. In contrast, if I see a repo with a CMakeLists.txt I know that it's going to be a simple cmake && make.
Citation needed.
Tools get misused all the time. If I use a flat bladed screw driver as a pry bar/chisel/whatever, that doesn't mean the flat bladed screw driver is hard to use.