I have to build many binary packages for several targets (crosscompiling) and there're just a few days when the autoconf'ed configure stuff works
withouut trouble. Carefully hand-written Makefiles and configure-scripts
work much better.
httpd has already been there. See the 1.3 configure script: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/1.3.x/configure
This is before my time as a dev, but I think that moving to autoconf has generally been better for 2.x. Someone who maintained the old configure system is welcome to voice their views. :-)
<snip>
If we import a new PCRE tree and we need to tweak their build system, then we can do that. But, introducing a dependency on automake isn't an acceptable solution. -- justin
If you repair pcre's (or some other package's) buildsystem - and freeing it from automake IS repairing it - I would be happy to see it this go back to the offical package. And if the maintainers refuse it, then just do a forkoff. In that case I'd offer to maintain and promote the forked branch.
Forking software over a build system is beyond lame. There are far more important things to divide a community over.
-Paul
