In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> qinxste> I also took some time to look into autoconf with friends and
> qinxste> I feel that openssl could really benefit from autoconf rather
> qinxste> than the current setup
>
> Possibly, but it adds another problem: autoconf is pretty Unix-centric.
> It does not solve any problem on all other OS:es, unless autoconf is
> ported. And then, you still need quite a lot of work (depending on
> how complicated your Configure.in is). And believe me, autoconf is
> definitely *not* an easy piece to port. Imagine translating all the
> sh lines in there to CMD (NT command interpreter) commands...
>
> But to autoconf's favor, it creates Configure scripts that will find
> out what your environment is capable of, instead of having a growing
> database of capabilities in the config script itself.
Yes, you're right. I've also to admit that Autoconf is very
Unix-centric. Hmmm... that's a good point we shouldn't forget...
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
