On 8/26/07, Ivo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I forsee Checking for Fortran compiler... etc.. > > > > I don't know what kind of traumas you suffered in your early > > development, but I had nothing to do with them. > > Insulting people doesn't make you look smarter.
Lighten up, Ivo. It was a joke. > ffmpeg's configure is not a lame non-portable config/build system. It's I'll take your word for it, although I'm not sure what it has to do with tinycc's config/build system. > perfectly cross-platform. IMHO autoconf stuff is horribly broken. ...etc... FWIW, you might consider some fact-checking. I don't know where you got the idea AC checks for FORTRAN, etc. for C projects, for example. That's plainly incorrect. Maybe you haven't look at it for a while; it's a lot better now than it was a few years ago. Still hideous, but it works. Automated, portable, etc. etc. configuration mgmt is an interesting topic, but for me at least now is not the time. I just want tinycc to work and I don't really care how. I happen to know AC/AM/etc fairly well so I'll probably give tinycc the treatment. I'm looking for people interested in testing, not debating the toolset; I just don't have time for that. AC/AM/etc may be the most hideous hairball in the cosmos, but they work pretty well and they seem to be known and used by many. For a small project like tcc, a big debate about config/build systems doesn't seem worth the trouble. Having said that, I might be persuaded to take a look at cmake (http://www.cmake.org/HTML/Index.html) if AC is a big issue for most people. I've not looked into it very far, but it seems to be gaining some traction and has fairly impressive feature set. -g _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
