On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:59:12 +0100, Ingmar Vanhassel wrote:
> 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
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 wast
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 19:20:50 -0500, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> > Your commit message has that flag word of "also" in it, and as it turns
> > out, the removal of Makefile.config from the repository has actually
> > happened already. But that was easy enough to fix.
>
> I was thinking that the
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 04:12:47PM -0800, Carl Worth wrote:
> Handling --prefix will be a nice addition to our configure script. So,
> thanks!
Yeah, it's definitely needed for the Debian packaging as well.
> Your commit message has that flag word of "also" in it, and as it turns
> out, the remova
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:57:35 -0500, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> This also removes the Makefile.config from the repository, since it
> shouldn't be kept in the repository and should be created by the
> configure script.
Hi Jamie,
Handling --prefix will be a nice addition to our configure scri
