I'll take a look at fixing this the right way today.
Since I wrote both the original autogen.sh that guaranteed static-components was ordered and PREFIX code, I had considered it to be a documented feature that there was strong otdering in the static-components list. So personally, I'd consider it a bug in autogen.pl, but I think we can work around it.
On Oct 26, 2010, at 6:01 AM, Sylvain Jeaugey wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>> I don't think this is the right way to fix it. Sorry! :-(
> I don't think it is the right way to do it either :-)
>> I say this because it worked somewhat by luck before, and now it's
>> broken. If we put in another "it'll work because of a side effect of an
>> unintentional characteristic of the build system" hack, it'll just
>> likely break again someday if/when we change the build system.
> I completely agree.
>> I'd prefer a more robust solution that won't break as a side-effect of
>> the build system.
> I'd prefer too, but it would require adding much more logic in the
> framework, including component sort with priority. And since no-one except
> me seems to care about this functionality, I'm fine with this patch.
> More generally, I understand your demand for high quality patches that do
> things The Right Way. However, I feel it's sometimes exagerated,
> especially when talking about parts of the code that don't meet these high
> quality standards.
> In the end, my feeling is that we don't replace very bad (broken) code
> with bad (working) code because we want to wait for a perfect (never
> happening) code. I don't think it's beneficial to the project.
> devel mailing list
Brian W. Barrett
Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software
Sandia National Laboratories