[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of s
From: |
Keith Marshall |
Subject: |
Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2) |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:33:15 +0000 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
On Tuesday 18 March 2008 02:28, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 17-Mar-2008, Keith Marshall wrote:
> | I've recently ported Andries Brouwer's, (now Federico Lucifredi's),
> | variant of John Eaton's man program, for use with MSYS, under
> | MS-Windows. That package came with a hand crafted configure
> | script, which "wasn't worth the effort of autoconfiscating, because
> | its requirements were so modest".
>
> I hope I'm not responsible for that. However, it's been a long time
> and I can't remember, so it is possible that the bad configure script
> is derived from something I wrote. It may even be fairly likely,
I really couldn't say; it was Andries who made the above comment, maybe
not in those exact words, but certainly to that effect.
> BTW, it seems unfortunate to me that there are now (at least) two
> separate versions of man based on what I wrote.
Unfortunate indeed, and now I've forked it again! Neither Andries nor
Federico seemed keen on the idea of exposing a public VCS repository,
(which would have made it so much easier for us to co-operate, with me
working on the Win32 port, while maintaining sync with their mainstream
updates), so I've created one for my port:
http://mingw.cvs.sourceforge.net/mingw/man/
> The man-db sources do include an autoconf-generated configure script.
> Why not use that version instead?
I did consider it, but it has evolved into a more complex codebase, and
apart from the lack of a good configure script, my initial attempts to
compile each of them suggested that I would encounter fewer porting
issues with the version I eventually chose; indeed, I had working code
within a matter of days, after manually hacking the files configure
should have generated, albeit lacking i18n features. Besides, the
exercise of autoconfiscating it gave me a good opportunity to learn how
to use autoconf for a full scale project, rather than simply patching
someone else's existing configuration code.
Regards,
Keith.
> jwe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), (continued)
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Dirk, 2008/03/18
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Paul Smith, 2008/03/18
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Bruce Korb, 2008/03/18
- RE: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless pieceof shit (2), zfred, 2008/03/18
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Bob Proulx, 2008/03/19
- Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Dan McMahill, 2008/03/18
- autoconf's goal [was: just one of a million reasons why autoconf...], Eric Blake, 2008/03/18
- Re: autoconf's goal [was: just one of a million reasons why autoconf...], Stepan Kasal, 2008/03/19
Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Keith Marshall, 2008/03/17
Re: just one of a million reasons why autoconf is a worthless piece of shit (2), Allan Clark, 2008/03/16