Russ says: > Harlan Stenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > One problem is that config.site is kinda lame - we really need nested or > > hierarchical config.site support. > > > I haven't see the case where a single config.site will really be of much > > use. > > You can set CONFIG_SITE to point to the appropriate one, which means that > one config.site file is sufficient; you just may have to have a large > collection of them.
Yes, my point exactly. We need a much friendlier way to handle config.site, or a functional equivalent. There is a chance that <http://ark.sourceforge.net> could be useful in this regard, too, and also <http://www.openpackages.org>. But this is perhaps a bit afield of the current discussion. H
