Tom Tromey wrote: > I agree that the move to the next autoconf will be hard for you. Sure. OTOH, I'm rather confident that the hard work, once done, will lead us to considerably simplify our configure script. Maybe this would also be a good opportunity for us to start using automake. -- / / _ _ Didier Verna http://www.inf.enst.fr/~verna/ - / / - / / /_/ / EPITA / LRDE mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ / /_/ / /__ / 14-16 rue Voltaire Tel. +33 (1) 44 08 01 77 94276 Kremlin-Bicêtre cedex Fax. +33 (1) 44 08 01 99
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Pavel Roskin
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Akim Demaille
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Greg A. Woods
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Tom Tromey
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Greg A. Woods
- Re: config.cache considered harmful Akim Demaille
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Martin Buchholz
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Pavel Roskin
- Re: config.cache considered harm... Akim Demaille
- Re: config.cache considered harmful Martin Buchholz
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Didier Verna
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Akim Demaille
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Russ Allbery
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Tom Tromey
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Didier Verna
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Russ Allbery
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Akim Demaille
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Martin Buchholz
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Akim Demaille
- Re: autoconf is broken in various ways Martin Buchholz