On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:59:12 +0100, Ingmar Vanhassel <ingmar at exherbo.org> 
> Excerpts from Carl Worth's message of Sat Dec 05 01:56:56 +0100 2009:
> > Cool. At least not everyone thinks I'm crazy then. That's
> > encouraging. :-)
> I'm not convinced that re-implementing lots of things that autoconf
> already handles properly & portably is the better route to go. It's
> purely a waste of time. Hence, I'll be happy to send patches to use
> autoconf, if you change your mind on the subject.

Let's test it.

If you could write a patch to replace our current configure script with
something based on autoconf, then I'll be glad to try it out and see
what I think.

If there are any differences that I find annoying, then we can see which
of those we can work around or get fixed in upstream autoconf.

I'm definitely open to exploration in this area.

> Now when you say you hate automake & libtool, then I'll wholeheartedly
> agree with you.

Hate is one emotion that I do my best to avoid. But I am quite glad to
have found no compelling reason to use either automake or libtool so
far in notmuch. :-)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available

Reply via email to