On Tuesday 04 September 2007 11:59:04 Per Jessen wrote: > > Dima, should we ever get that far, don't feel obliged to use the > autoconf'ed version.
Heh. I hope you'll be kind enough to give me the choice -- most of them are "run ./configure or go lose yourself in twisty maze of little shell scripts, all alike". The point I'm trying to make, autoconf, like most other goodies, brings in a whole new level of complexity and a new source of failures. The smart thing to do is to carefully consider the actual (not perceived) benefits vs. the costs. With autoconf the main cost is well known build failures on non-GNU platforms/with non-GNU build tools (where analog currently builds just fine -- last I checked). Dima -- Dimitri Maziuk Programmer/sysadmin BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu +------------------------------------------------------------------------ | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list: | http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help | | Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general +------------------------------------------------------------------------
