Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Bruce Korb wrote:

> Harlan Stenn wrote:
>
> > For packages that are "big enough" (ie, that have a large/slow run of
> > "configure"), this is an unnacceptable solution.
>
> Even small packages with few needs beyond what ought to be simple, vanilla
> POSIX stuff require monsterous configs.  Isn't everything "big enough"?  :)

The large size is due to the inclusion of a self-bootstrapping, 
self-compiling, and fully-obfusticated (try to find it!), lisp 
interpreter into every configure script. This is necessary in order to 
observe GNU standards which specify that GUILE shall be the standard 
language for scripts.  Is that a problem?

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/