On Wednesday, 18 February 2004, at 03:27:44 (+0100), Michel Briand wrote: > I think one of our priorities should be to clean up building > system. I'm used to Linux building environement such as > automake/autoconf but as stated by Vincent and Mike another build > system is probably a better choice.
This custom-build-system-du-jour thing has been attempted before, and it always leads to portability issues, packaging issues, and ultimately a return to auto* tools. When somebody makes a set of tools that can match auto* in terms of portability (and no, I don't just mean Linux!), static/shared library support, etc., there's a hope of switching. Until then, we've made very clear which versions of the auto* tools work. Use them. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "And I'll take with me the memories to be my sunshine after the rain. It's so hard to say goodbye to yesterday." -- Boyz II Men ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
